Chess Pwn's page

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot

link

This seems to be saying that familiars with an armor slot can wear non magic armor

... they are either making this incredibly weird or explaining it very poorly.

Full suit of plate armor on a weasel: no problem

Enchant it... ERKS! It won't go on....

???

I agree, hence me asking if she meant to say that or if it was only taking about animal companions.

There seems to be a decent chance that she didn't mean it. I asked it along with the question of if animals without the saddle slot can wear mundane saddles and her response was that the leadership would need to discuss that part more. Maybe she meant both, maybe she was just talking about the saddle question needing more time.

Gauss, Can you post the build for that US dex monk. I'll have time later to build a weapon using str monk to compare against it. But it's difficult when I don't know any of your numbers besides AC.

Because getting 6 attacks for average of 5 damage each (I know it's higher, I'm exaggerating to show that I want numbers to compare against) isn't going to beat 4 attacks doing 20 each.

If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot

link

I thought so. Thank you.

You know, to be honest, it's one of the few things that cheeses me about Pathfinder dragons. They're these powerful magical beasts who have awesome DR, but magic cuts through it like butter. And by the time a party faces a dragon, they usually have mostly magical weapons, making the dragon's DR mostly pointless.

I know it's a balancing issue, and most dragons are powerful enough anyway, especially if they don't land and fight the party in melee. But why give them DR/magic if it's mostly pointless?

Anyway, thanks for the help, I'm going to message my GM with the quote from the SRD to show him the rule.

Dr magic makes then immune to npcs badically. A dragon can take on an army cause the non magic weapons don't faze it. You need adventures with expensive gear to fight it and have a chance. So it's more a fluff mechanic then a balancing against PCs mechanic

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Cloren Chenross wrote:

Hmm.. did I misunderstand Practiced diplomat? I thought it was the minimum roll you added to your skill but if it's the minimum skill check..it's a waste given I'm in the 32+ Range with a 'take 1' On diplomacy

They made official clarification soon after the cards were published that it's the minimum result.

The minimum roll would make it really good, being able to roll and have a min result be a take 10 or better would be really awesome.

And that's why it's viewed so bad, most if not all the skills on there are going to be higher than that if they are trying to be a real member and thus a waste. It's only real benefit is the 5 cha dwarf that wants to auto-aid on the skill with no ranks into it.

Whereas the lowest I can make on the skill rolls I make On that list is matching fr k(nobles). Everything else is nearly mid-20s or higher. Sigh.. totally useless

Exactly.

The thing I see is that archery usually wants a lot of feats.
PBS
Precise shot
Rapid shot
deadly aim
manyshot

so it kinda depends on which race you want, and if there are other feats you want.
Like to me, divine hunter is worth it, even with all the bad trades, simply cause I want the feats online faster. Having PBS, precise and rapid all at lv1 is pretty fun.

Chess Pwn wrote:

So does that mean I can't ride anything that isn't the animal type?

Didn't say that. Didn't hint that. Didn't imply it.

The rules that are there assume that you are riding an animal

My question was trying to find the intent of this statement. You use the word animal. Animal is a game term and thus you might have been meaning to reference the game term or you might have been meaning to reference the more general non-game meaning. So I was clarifying if you meant the game term or not.

Clearly you didn't mean to reference the animal game term via your reaction here.

But you need to realize that you not meaning to say something doesn't mean you didn't say something. You EASILY could have meant animal as per the game term, because that makes a logical statement still, "The game assumes only riding animal type creatures."

And I hope you take questions as clarifying your meaning instead of trying to misuse, misquote or put words in your mouth.

magic items intent is pretty much to "break/bypass" some rules now and again. ring of evasion breaks reflex for half damage rules. Ring of sustenance breaks survival gather food rules. cord of stubborn resolve breaks lack of sleep rules and rage rules. sharding and blink back belt breaks throwing rules. Impact breaks weapon damage for size rules. muleback cords breaks encumbrance rules. Comfort breaks ACP rules. Bracers of armor break monks no armor rules. Etc.

Many magic items and enhancements make certain rules no longer apply to the character.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

There are no rules to prevent you from riding anything you want, while there are rules telling you what happens when you ride anything. Thus it's allowed.

The rules that are there assume that you are riding an animal that is more or less willing to have you there and working with you

The further you go from that assumption, the grayer the area gets, and the more the dm is apt to say "oh hell no" and with good cause.

So does that mean I can't ride anything that isn't the animal type?

Cause if you're using "animal" but meant more like "creature" then that's exactly what is going on. One human creature is more or less willing to have you there and work with you.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Tallow wrote:

Considering bipeds don't have belt/chest [saddle] they can't wear saddles.

As a GM, I'm going to go with no until told otherwise. It seems the i tent is you can only ride things made to be ridden.

but you can ride a snake and they don't have a saddle slot. You just ride them bareback and take the appropriate penalties.

There are no rules to prevent you from riding anything you want, while there are rules telling you what happens when you ride anything. Thus it's allowed.

There aren't any rules that says you can ride anything.

There are rules for riding an inappropriate mount. Is a person an appropriate mount for a person? No. Then it's an inappropriate mount. Because inappropriate mount is anything you're using as a mount that you shouldn't be used as a mount.

EDIT: The actual line is "If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount" so that is what I'm condensing to "inappropriate mount"

Considering bipeds don't have belt/chest [saddle] they can't wear saddles.

As a GM, I'm going to go with no until told otherwise. It seems the i tent is you can only ride things made to be ridden.

but you can ride a snake and they don't have a saddle slot. You just ride them bareback and take the appropriate penalties.

There are no rules to prevent you from riding anything you want, while there are rules telling you what happens when you ride anything. Thus it's allowed.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

It still seems like no, but some are saying this is only for magic items and not limiting mundane stuff, but it would be nice for clarity on which is actually correct. Cause I still feel I'm bound to say that the FMFC can't have a saddle for their snake and familiars can't wear armor.

Keep in mind that when that was pointed out, a few critters that cannonically can wear saddles were being excluded (and still are from the blog list, but not the faq list)

The blog was a peek preview at the FAQ. So I doubt they are going to fix the blog since it was basically allowing the test run, early access preview, of the final FAQ would be.

most 3/4 bab classes will have in class attack and damage boosters to make them comparable to a full bab class.
Like occultist has legacy weapon and resonance power to str faster than a belt can be bought to have good accuracy.
Summoner has heroism, mounted usually gets the +1 for higher ground, and you're likely charging like all the time since you're not full attack reliant.
WP has swift action fervor for buffs.
Druid has wild shape and spells.
Cleric has a few domains and spells.
bard has heroism/good hope, inspire courage.
Unchained rogues get debilitating strike to lower AC.
hunter has animal focus
inquisitor has judgment and bane.
ETC.

Hmm.. did I misunderstand Practiced diplomat? I thought it was the minimum roll you added to your skill but if it's the minimum skill check..it's a waste given I'm in the 32+ Range with a 'take 1' On diplomacy

They made official clarification soon after the cards were published that it's the minimum result.

And that's why it's viewed so bad, most if not all the skills on there are going to be higher than that if they are trying to be a real member and thus a waste. It's only real benefit is the 5 cha dwarf that wants to auto-aid on the skill with no ranks into it.

I entered their square xD

between having a 32 Dex at level 14 + bracers of Armour + Tiny + Amulet + Ring I had pretty high AC + Mirror image + parry riposte. I 5 ft stepped when I could be didn't get hit very much anyway.

The 5ft step still provokes if entering their square.

Based on this and Linda's previous statement, if they have the armor slot available, they can wear armor.

Which is why I asked

Is this saying what I think it's saying, that familiars with the armor slot possible can wear mundane armor without any feats. Or was your comment only for animals?

Because it does seem like it, so that's what I'll be going with. But I asked so that if that wasn't what was meant they could correct it.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Tallow wrote:

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

Tallow wrote:

Just for clarity and a sanity check:

What Thomas Hutchins is asking, is can a horse wear a mundane saddle.

Currently, they can, and the FAQ only refers to magic item slots.

But Linda's answer seems to imply, that the PFS Leadership team is going to double check rules and make sure that a horse doesn't need to take extra item slot for belt to be able to wear a mundane saddle.

That was not how I interpreted his question. What I interpreted was "can creatures who do not have saddle magic item slots or armor magic item slots still wear saddles/armor but not enchant it?" If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot.

Is this saying what I think it's saying, that familiars with the armor slot possible can wear mundane armor without any feats. Or was your comment only for animals?

They still need the armor proficiency

Proficiency is just to determine if they take penalties to attacks and stuff or just skills. That is different from the ability to legally have any armor on them. Like snakes can't wear armor regardless of what feats they may have granting armor proficiency, no slot. But a monkey "could" gain the slot via feat, but is that just for magic or also apply to mundane. So is a monkey without extra slot armor is the same as a snake, unable to wear armor?

First line of the FAQ says, "An animal companion has access to the armor and neck magic item slots automatically, as long as its body shape is eligible for these slots."

Linda later says, "If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot."

I interpret that to mean, if the animal has the armor slot, it automatically has the ability to wear magical armor, and thus can wear mundane armor. Currently, if it does not have the...

You're missing my point. Yes animals automatically have the armor slot, but the FAMILIAR's aren't automatically granted the armor slot. Thus does having the slot allow them to wear mundane armor or not? That I feel isn't clear (or it's clear in that it's saying yes they need the feat to wear mundane armor, but that seems like it could be wrong.)

Exotic Saddle is for all the creatures that have the belt/chest [saddle] slot that is not a horse or a camel

Do you have a source for this?

Cause what I see is
Saddles are used to support a rider or supplies on a mount.
and
Exotic saddles are custom-made for unusual mounts.

And the argument is, that any animal with the saddle slot is obviously a mount with normal saddle, and that exotic saddles are for mounts that don't have the slot, since they usually aren't mounts.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

Tallow wrote:

Just for clarity and a sanity check:

What Thomas Hutchins is asking, is can a horse wear a mundane saddle.

Currently, they can, and the FAQ only refers to magic item slots.

But Linda's answer seems to imply, that the PFS Leadership team is going to double check rules and make sure that a horse doesn't need to take extra item slot for belt to be able to wear a mundane saddle.

That was not how I interpreted his question. What I interpreted was "can creatures who do not have saddle magic item slots or armor magic item slots still wear saddles/armor but not enchant it?" If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot.

Is this saying what I think it's saying, that familiars with the armor slot possible can wear mundane armor without any feats. Or was your comment only for animals?

They still need the armor proficiency

Proficiency is just to determine if they take penalties to attacks and stuff or just skills. That is different from the ability to legally have any armor on them. Like snakes can't wear armor regardless of what feats they may have granting armor proficiency, no slot. But a monkey "could" gain the slot via feat, but is that just for magic or also apply to mundane. So is a monkey without extra slot armor is the same as a snake, unable to wear armor?

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

Tallow wrote:

Just for clarity and a sanity check:

What Thomas Hutchins is asking, is can a horse wear a mundane saddle.

Currently, they can, and the FAQ only refers to magic item slots.

But Linda's answer seems to imply, that the PFS Leadership team is going to double check rules and make sure that a horse doesn't need to take extra item slot for belt to be able to wear a mundane saddle.

Well mainly if a snake, frog, t-rex can wear a mundane exotic saddle ever.

It appears, currently, the answer is no, as they don't have a saddle slot.

Right, but there are lots of people that then say stuff like, "Then what's the purpose of exotic saddle?" and "this thing is only dealing with magic items/slots, mundane stuff in those slots is fine".

medium gets a good amount of bonus damage per hit and gets extra attacks.
fighters gets lots of static damage bonuses.

WP isn't that great cause the damage of sacred weapon goes down based on your size, so they'd need to make up what tiny is. Yes it'll probably be more than the normal weapons still, but not by as much.

Tallow wrote:

Just for clarity and a sanity check:

What Thomas Hutchins is asking, is can a horse wear a mundane saddle.

Currently, they can, and the FAQ only refers to magic item slots.

But Linda's answer seems to imply, that the PFS Leadership team is going to double check rules and make sure that a horse doesn't need to take extra item slot for belt to be able to wear a mundane saddle.

That was not how I interpreted his question. What I interpreted was "can creatures who do not have saddle magic item slots or armor magic item slots still wear saddles/armor but not enchant it?" If you have a saddle or armor slot, you can definitely wear mundane saddles or armor without taking Extra Item Slot.

Is this saying what I think it's saying, that familiars with the armor slot possible can wear mundane armor without any feats. Or was your comment only for animals?

Just for clarity and a sanity check:

What Thomas Hutchins is asking, is can a horse wear a mundane saddle.

Currently, they can, and the FAQ only refers to magic item slots.

But Linda's answer seems to imply, that the PFS Leadership team is going to double check rules and make sure that a horse doesn't need to take extra item slot for belt to be able to wear a mundane saddle.

Well mainly if a snake, frog, t-rex can wear a mundane exotic saddle ever.

I'll just go ahead and say that I don't see this FAQ as raising the cost. I see it as affirming the way I already calculated it.

Generally speaking, if there are two equally valid ways to interpret a rule, the safest thing to do is to use the more expensive/restrictive interpretation. Then all your surprise rulings are happy surprises. If you choose to do otherwise, your disappointment is on you.

I don't know, having had how many years of discounted gear vs not having the discounted gear ever? Seems like disappointment at time of FAQ could still be worth all the time beforehand that you benefited from the unclarity.

Thomas Hutchins wrote:

So this still doesn't answer 2 of the big questions I felt were asked about this FAQ.

Can animals without Saddle slots wear mundane saddles?
Like the frogs or especially snake cause of the First Mother's Fang Cavalier.

Can familiars without spending the feat on the armor slot wear mundane armor?

It still seems like no, but some are saying this is only for magic items and not limiting mundane stuff, but it would be nice for clarity on which is actually correct. Cause I still feel I'm bound to say that the FMFC can't have a saddle for their snake and familiars can't wear armor.

Replying to assure you that we have not forgotten about these questions. They are important questions, but also ones that will require a larger discussion and review of existing rules. We have them on the docket for after Gen Con.

Thanks, it's good to know that and that these apparently aren't just easy questions that one should clearly know the answer to from this post.

Question now that DR was mentioned and I recently talked about this with a friend.

Are we keeping the whole "enough magic bypasses DR" rule of pathfinder? And if so, does it work the same with ranged weapons as it does in pathfinder?

So this still doesn't answer 2 of the big questions I felt were asked about this FAQ.

Can animals without Saddle slots wear mundane saddles?
Like the frogs or especially snake cause of the First Mother's Fang Cavalier.

Can familiars without spending the feat on the armor slot wear mundane armor?

It still seems like no, but some are saying this is only for magic items and not limiting mundane stuff, but it would be nice for clarity on which is actually correct. Cause I still feel I'm bound to say that the FMFC can't have a saddle for their snake and familiars can't wear armor.

So this still doesn't answer 2 of the big questions I felt were asked about this FAQ.

Can animals without Saddle slots wear mundane saddles?
Like the frogs or especially snake cause of the First Mother's Fang Cavalier.

Can familiars without spending the feat on the armor slot wear mundane armor?

It still seems like no, but some are saying this is only for magic items and not limiting mundane stuff, but it would be nice for clarity on which is actually correct. Cause I still feel I'm bound to say that the FMFC can't have a saddle for their snake and familiars can't wear armor.

Ability damage applies a -1 to some stuff.

Intelligence: Damage to your Intelligence score causes you to take penalties on Intelligence-based skill checks. This penalty also applies to any spell DCs based on Intelligence. A character with an Intelligence score of 0 is comatose.

That's what int damage does.

I don't feel you need that high of a int for investigator's. Personally I'd swap the str and int of that build for that build. Maybe even drop wisdom a little to start off with the 16 (int).

FelwynGD wrote:

Would taking a level in sleuth investigator and then going straight swashbuckler be worth it for the double CHA mod to their pool and the added versatility of the pool?

You do not get the CHA bonus twice. This is explained at the end of the sleuth archetype under Grit, Luck, and Panache

This is the issue with Necro threads, at the time of that post they were correct and that box explicitly said they stacked. When the errata went out they changed it to not stack. No online site has been updated with the current errata for it, so the PRD and such all still have the old text that says it stacks.

Doesn't ascetic style help with the ki strike thing?

Sure it can if you want to use that chain and it's legal for you.

That's my point Blymurkla, avoiding those gotcha moments.

Creating a unique rule breaking item or something is fine, that's just part of the game.

Creating mechanics that this ledge stuff will deny dex is fine (assuming the real rules didn't), IF the players know about it before having to deal with the ledge. But they shouldn't be on the ledge when they find out that the ledge was penalizing them.

Or to power your style strike for your "pounce" since that also requires an US.

And my things aren't saying they can't be overcome, but that those would be reasons to not play it.

I don't see that many full bralwers, and the ones I do are mutagenic maulers for the attack boost, Cavalier's have improved charges for attack boosts and the popular orders I've seen are ones that add accuracy on the challenge.

Like it's not that the class is useless, but not having them is a reason people wouldn't play the class, especially when coupled with the need to try and figure out how to get AC up since you can't wear armor.

Are they amazing? Yes, that's why I like them so much, but it explains why they aren't widespread.

So for the modifications, I think if you make something magic after it's on there's no increase. It's only for adding the modification after it's already magic that gets the increase.

So if you have a Large Masterwork Cold Iron Razor-Sharp Greatsword should cost 1500 GP making it +1 costs 4000 for a total of 5500.

If it was a +1 Cold Iron Greatsword it would be 4500 and adding razor-sharp would be 1500 for total of 6000gp

Cause they can't wear armor is why is not popular. Also they still have no in class attack boosters, so they are less accurate than other full bab classes

yes, unchained gets 1.5 str like normal. That's why I have a bloodraging monk, that goes to town with a sansetsukon.

The downside and why you don't see it all that much is the not wearing armor deal, so it's not the easiest to multi-class with.

See I always saw petition as a way to get common voices together, not to bully the leadership to doing something, but a way to get a unified focussed voice to voice an opinion and to propose a certain desired outcome. Everyone knows that you could have a petition with everyone agreeing and hundreds of people and not get the request granted.

Like would a thread titled "Thread to have everyone share why this FAQ should be rescinded" or the likes have come across any differently?

Discussion seems wrong since we don't get any input from the people who write the FAQs, the DEVS, thus there's no back and forth, no ability for discussion to actually happen, so petition or the likes seems correct since it's just trying to garner support for a view. A petition or request is how it seems our relationship with the PDT is. We just throw our voice at them and then wait to see what happens.

I'm quite curious as to why you have such a critical and negative view about this word choice.

AoO isn't an attack action, it's an AoO, a non-action.

Thank you for all those informations, but now I have fresher ones :d Would you recommend medium armor proficency and multiclassing for STR build ? And what minimum number would be good for DEX in a STR build ?

Do you gain access to traits?

Chess Pwn wrote:

with those stats I'd suggest dropping dex to a 14 and boosting con to a 12, getting 1 hp per level for "free" is pretty good.

But I guess before that, How are stats generated? Are those stats before or after a race? Do you have a race in mind?

Those stats has been generated after human. I would like to play as human because bonus feat+skill focus would be good and it's iconic for investigator. But if I would decide to go for a dex inv. I might consider sylph or elf.

If that's the case for human I strongly suggest 14+2/14/14/14/12/8 for the stat spread for str and 10/16+2/12/16/10/8 for dex. If elf I'd suggest 10/16+2/14-2/14+2/12/8. Trying to stay close to your original stats.

Cause with only 10 con and a d8 you can be in trouble if something hits you.

So to summery though.

Dex based is to boost AC, to consolidate stat points, and still be okay in a fight. Very popular to go 1 level of inspired blade swashbuckler to get Dex to damage with a rapier from lv1. And your mutagen boosts AC more and penalizes your wisdom, which isn't your main stat.

With this build you're using a rapier or similar weapon, wearing mithral chain, and using a buckler. AC is really high.

Str builds are used but you kinda need to decide what you're benchmark is for skills to really use them. They will wield a two handed weapon, maybe with reach, and be looking to get power attack and str mutagen. Your offensive powers can keep up with the best of them, and you still are great at skills, very much enough for me to call them a skill monkey. Your AC is lower than the dex build, but easily high enough to be fine on the front line.

with those stats I'd suggest dropping dex to a 14 and boosting con to a 12, getting 1 hp per level for "free" is pretty good.
But I guess before that, How are stats generated? Are those stats before or after a race? Do you have a race in mind?

Zachary Davis wrote:

Fromper, I am with you on this. My only character that is affected by it is my -1 and maybe a total of 450gp for large +1 studded for my battle kitten.

I thought this was pathfinder not "Pimp My Pet"

EDIT: Another thing, in reference to buying tiny armor and then enhancement for fitting. In the CRB, tiny armor has their armor bonus divided by 2 I think. So, it may not work as theorized, since armor growing larger does not increase it's armor bonus.

By that logic you could by medium fitting armor and put it on tje familiar for full ac

Yeah, pretty sure it's whatever size the armor currently is. If you're small and reduce person now the AC gets cut in half. If you're tiny and enlarged the AC would go to normal. Same with fitting armor.

I think that adding in their stat blocks the descriptions of what the abilities do, similar to how the prgens do it, would be helpful. That way you have the text you need to run the scenario in the scenario and don't have to wade through all the rulebook to figure it out.
Do people agree?

I don't think so.

What I find ironic, is that people have been clamoring, whining, cajoling, asking, requesting this issue be clarified for years now.

Now that its clarified, people are clamoring, whining, cajoling, asking, and requesting that the answer be rescinded because it wasn't answered in the way they thought it should be.

I believe most are

Sure there are some that are hopeful that such hurdles will cause the PDT to change the rules.
But there are a good amount that are fine with getting cheaper armor via magic.

KingOfAnything wrote:

Everyone would like this FAQ reevaluated.

Yes. This. That's why this doesn't belong in the PFS forum.

Also, whenever people post a rules question in the PFS forum (on the basis that "home games can house rule it"), they're told that it belongs in the rules forum, not the PFS forum.

This is clearly a rules question, as it's asking for a reevaluation of a FAQ that is really an errata that changes rules and raises a lot of rules confusion.

If the OP has posted just that, a request to re-evaluate the FAQ then I agree it belongs in rules.

But asking for a suspension, and one reason for that being PFS's big con, isn't a rules question. PDT don't do "suspensions" of FAQs, so PFS is the only one able to do a suspension. And thus the PFS forum.

take the flurry and the crane wing examples. Both just stayed there until the new updated re-evaluated answers went live.
That's just how it goes.
So a "suspension" of asking to have it removed while/if they re-evaluate it isn't what the PDT do.

It would need to be more than a forum post to override the CRB and APG FAQs that both state they count as full members of the race full all the stuff and so on. Since the item itself says elves treat it as martial, rather than relying on normal elf weapon familiarity, half-elves get proficiency.

Right, RAW is set, but sometimes in home games it's fun to go by RAI rather than RAW. But we only know if RAI is different from RAW if there's a sources somewhere.