Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
General Gorstav

Daryl MacLeod's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 260 posts (1,232 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Sczarni

Ampersandrew wrote:
Daryl MacLeod wrote:
PS: My comment was made in jest.
I know that, I don't think the person who responded to you did. I may be wrong about that.

Just re-read this thread and realized that was where you were coming from. Not sure how I gapped out and missed it the first time through.

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
If you were new to Pathfinder/D&D 3.5, which way would YOU choose for the game to work? I'm confident that tha devs chose 'our' way of reading it as part of their writing process.

That's hilarious! Scroll back a few pages and you will find quotes (with links to the original posts) from just about every person on the development team who frequents these boards unilaterally diasgreeing with your camps point of view.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Unless, of course, you 'decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks.'

That right there ^ is where you slide off the rails. You are not being asked to decide between iterative attacks or a move action - you are being asked to decide between a Standard Action or a Full-Attack.

-A Full-Attack is a full round action that prohibits movement (other then a 5' step).

-A Standard Action is not a full round action and allows you enough time left over to take a Move action.

Generally speaking a character does not have to decide between an Attack (standard action) or a Full-Attack (full round action) until after he or she has made their first attack.

There are of course Feats and Abilities that preclude being able to make this choice.

Sczarni

Be careful about multiclassing though. PF has been changed to somewhat discourage multiclassing.

With 3.5 it could be extremely advantagous to multi-class - I find that in PF it more often pays better rewards to focus on a single class.

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:
JohnF wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Axl wrote:
Hrothgar Rannúlfr wrote:

Unless we conclude that the Paizo staff does not know how to properly interpret their own rules...

Flurry of blows...

He meant the rules team. :)

Which does clearly demonstrate that the Paizo rules team do, occasionally, write the rules in such a way that it's easy to interpret them in a way contrary to what the rules writers think they say.
I agree. :)

This is not an example of that. The rules are crystal clear in this case. You must make a full-attack in order to gain the benefit from Manyshot. Making a full-attack precludes movement beyond a 5' step.

Sczarni

Now switch Rogue to Ninja and gain a Ki Pool to go with your nice CHA score.

I haven't verified it but I've seen it mentioned that the Scout arcetype would be legal for a Ninja to use.

Vanishing Trick FTW!

Sczarni

Malachi: you post long posts! I basically stop reading them so I apologize. I did read to the part where you go off the rails: making an attack and cashing in your iterative attacks for a move action IS NOT a full attack.

It's the "Attack" referred to in "Deciding between an Attack and a Full Attack".

Regrettably until this sinks in we'll just keep chasing our tails.

Sczarni

Barbarians go well with Rogue. Play a Shoanti and use an Earthbreaker + Sap Master!

Personally, regardless of which build you go with I'd consider taking Furious Focus sooner if possible. It synergizes soooo well with Power Attack - especially at low levels and even more so for a 3/4 BAB class. The last thing a 3/4 bab class needs is penalties to attack rolls.

If you do decide to dip Fighter or Barbarian take that class first - more HP and +1 Bab gives more options for feats @ first level. Heck, take Weapon Focus, Power Attack & Furious Focus at level 1 if you go Fighter.

Sczarni

PS: My comment was made in jest.

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Probably because it's small & you'll get great mileage with it.

Sczarni

Power Attack + Furious Focus for the win!

Sczarni

Tels wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Tels wrote:
Marius Castille wrote:
I haven't played a monk in ages but one idea I had was burning a feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency and using a glaive (for the reach). That would seem to dovetail well with combat reflexes, especially at lower levels.
The problem with this is then you don't get the full BAB because you can't flurry with a Glaive (not a Monk weapon).
Sohei?
That's one way, but not until 6th level IIRC.

1level of Cleric + Crusaders Flurry. If Sheylin is your deity you now fluffy w/glaive and get 3:1 with Power Attack on account of 2 handed weapon.

Or how about a Hungry Ghost Monk of Sarenrae with a keen scimitar?

Sczarni

Can't you also get a bite attack with Ranger? Two good saves, lots of skills and favored enemy are always nice!

Sczarni

Props for using gallivanting in a sentence. That's a word I'd like to see more of.

Sczarni

That's the reason I take it. Don't recall ever making a caster level check with my rangers... But it is great for self buffs etc.

Sczarni

In my home game we use the templates from d20pfsrd, what's the ruling for Society play? I have PFS character that uses a Horse Chopper - this diagonal craziness hasn't come up but I guess if it does I'll just shut-up and deal with it...

Sczarni

If he didn't include full stops he would have inserted the quote. There should be a button at the bottom of your screen (under the box you post in) that says "how to format your text". If you click that it will show you how to use bold and italics etc.

Sczarni

I like some of the Halfling stuff from the ARG. So much so that they are probably my second choice to human for many classes. Half-Orcs got a boost as well. And until they errata some of the alternate racial traits I'll let my players dump dark vision for skill points and then drop ferocity for even better dark vision (at least I think those are the traits that are replaced - don't have my book in front of me).

Sczarni

How does this feat interact with Power Attack? It seems clear your Klar is supposed to be an offhand/light weapon, but is the Earthbreaker treated as a one handed weapon even though it's a two handed weapon?

Sczarni

This speaks to the importance of making an effort to undetstand the spirit of the rule. It's clear that the intent is to provide a maximum bonus of up to +2, so long as you don't exceed you current HD.

As for the Wizard 5/Fighter 1 - allowing a caster level of 6 passes the sniff test: it doesn't reek of cheese.

It's not just for multi-classing though. Magical Knack is almost a must have for my Ranger characters.

Sczarni

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Shame to waste a feat on it. Might want to consider a dip into a class that grants medium armour proficiency.

Or choose a different fighter archetype if Lore Warden isnt vital to your build.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It blows my mind that we're still going round and round 750 posts later. The RAW could not be any more clear.

Sczarni

Thod wrote:
Gauss wrote:

Thod:

I suggest you read this post of mine that explains the different points.

- Gauss

Yes - I did read this earlier.

It might even have spawned the idea for my post. Because if specific isn't trumping general than what I wrote becomes possible - or you would have different rulings for high and low levels.

To be honest when I read your previous post Thod, I couldn't really ascertain what question you were asking or which position you were supporting - if you don't mind re-phrasing it may elicit a more detailed response.

Also, bear in mind one of the prerequisites for Manyshot is BAB +6, which insures you're getting at least 1 iterative attack. Then again if you feel option 1 in the original post is a valid interpretation of the RAW & RAI you're obvioulsy ignoring prerequisites (and common sense) so your questions become valid in that context...

Then again I'm admittedly uncertain what you're asking...

Sczarni

The Guided property is not 3rd party as someone alluded to above. And it is usable on ranged weapons - at least it was used on a ranged weapon in the Paizo published Curse of the Crimsom Throne adventure path.

CotCT Spoiler:
There is an NPC called the Cinderlander who has a Guided Crossbow in "A History of Ashes".

I don't have the book in front of me at the moment but I will check and see how & if it modified attack rolls...

I will admit I have not seen it any Paizo material that wasn't written as basically 3.5 stuff from back in the day - so maybe they banned it?

I can tell you that the sourcebook it appears in is not listed as acceptable material for PFS play.

Sczarni

Gauss wrote:

Adamantine Dragon:

Do you still assert that the section on 'Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack' is deciding between two forms of Full attack?

- Gauss

That is what he is asserting. I don't think he'll answer you though - so maybe he'll correct me for answering for him if I'm wrong.

Edit: Ninja'd by the man himself!

But you're still wrong - full attacks do not allow you to move anything more then a 5' step. If you make an Attack and then follow it up with a move action you are not making a Full Attack.

Sczarni

Skylancer4 wrote:
Daryl MacLeod wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Which would be using a ranged weapon as an improvised "melee" weapon? Maybe it is a reading comprehension "thing."

For the sake of argument can you quote the rule that says an improvised weapon cannot be used to make a Trip attempt?

While I'm not convinced that a Zen Archer should be wasting his time trying to trip foes while using his bow as an improvised weapon, I don't think it's the 'Trip' rules that prohibit it... There may be rules specific to the Zen Archer (like Axl referenced) that prohibit such a thing however...

Either read the spoiler above where they copied/pasted Trip or read Trip. The TRIP ability states melee attack. If you are using your bow to make ranged attacks you are failing to make a melee attack and so are unable replace the attack to trip. You can use any weapon you want to attempt a trip as per the FAQ, if the weapon is making a ranged attack you are unable to use the Trip attack as per the CM write up. Unless you are using the bow as an improvised weapon to make a melee attack, trip is off-limits.

You're jumping to incorrect conclusions. Nobody is asserting that the Zen Archer is making ranged attacks. We're talking about using a bow as an improvised weapon to make melee attacks. So I guess it is a reading comprehension "thing".

Again please cite the rule that says you cannot make a melee attack with an improvised weapon to make a trip attempt.

To be clear I'm not arguing that this allowable - I just don't think it's prohibited by the rule you think it is.

Sczarni

Skylancer4 wrote:
Which would be using a ranged weapon as an improvised "melee" weapon? Maybe it is a reading comprehension "thing."

For the sake of argument can you quote the rule that says an improvised weapon cannot be used to make a Trip attempt?

While I'm not convinced that a Zen Archer should be wasting his time trying to trip foes while using his bow as an improvised weapon, I don't think it's the 'Trip' rules that prohibit it... There may be rules specific to the Zen Archer (like Axl referenced) that prohibit such a thing however...

Sczarni

I'm playing a Ranger Guide and to be honest I'm lamenting the fact I can't use Instant Enemy spell and I don't have an Animal Companion.

Also, Kukri's would save you a feat.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for posting that stuff from JJ.

Now that we can put the nonsensensical debate regarding "Deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack" behind us we can now debate Manyshot.

Oh, wait. No debate is needed as the rules are crystal clear on what kind of action is required with Manyshot...

Gauss - you mentioned above that the rules for deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack had to be somewhere - I think they were placed where they are for a reason...

For the first 5 levels of the game (assuming full BAB progression) there is very little differenc between a Standard Action & a Full-Attack (barring specific feats and abilities that are governed with specific rules pertaining to their use). When you only get 1 attack action with either a Standard or Full round action the general rules don't come into effect much.

Once you hit BAB 6/1 and have iterative attacks without relying on special abilities or feats it makes sense that the clarification pertaining to Attack actions and Full Attack actions be presented under the Full Attack heading - afterall, the Standard action has remained the same throughout.

Not sure if that makes sense as I am neither articulate or eloquent...

Sczarni

Karlgamer wrote:

Instead of arguing I wish people would actually do some research.

Here are some usefull links

PRD I copy and past from here when I want to post Official rules.

Rules of the Game Here is where I go when I want to understand a difficult rule.

Pathfinder SRD When the PRD just won't do.

JAMES JACOBS James Jacobs knows his stuff. Ask him questions. Don't tell him I sent you. ;)

These forums 90% of the time the answer to your question is going to be answered promptly/correctly.

Dictionary don't assume you know what a word means.

Revised (v.3.5)SRD flip over your CRB you see "3.5 * OGL compatible" this is that.

Pathfinder Frequently Asked Questions We love to argue don't we. Here is where our arguments end. :(

Thank you for that. I followed the link to rules of the game and read the entry on Actions (part one).

In that article Skip Williams clearly explains the following (under using actions);

skip williams wrote:

In most cases, you have the following three options available to you during your turn (choose one):

-One standard action plus one move action.
-Two move actions.
-One full-round action.

Why is this significant? Because it should put to rest the insane assertion that you can use one standard action plus one move action and call it a "Full-Attack" and then attempt to game the system by applying the benefits of Manyshot (which requires a Full Attack) to this standard action.

Sczarni

master arminas wrote:

Martial artist is a good archetype, but poorly written in places. He still has abundant step, but no ki to use it, for example.

MA

Or dip 2 levels Rogue/Ninja to get a Ki Pool and voila! Abundant Step. Throw in the Dimensional Agility feat chain and you have a Nightcrawler to call your own.

Sczarni

Remember the Rogue's Sneak Attack does not multiply on a critical hit.

So really if she wants to hit a lot she should play a ful BAB class.

Fighters, Paladins and Rangers all have proficiency in Kukri's so you get to save a feat.

Each of them has additional static damage that they can add to the hits and it gets multiplied on critical hits.

I did the numbers a while back comparing Ranger to Fighter and I believe the Ranger's "Favoured Enemy" bonus out paces the Fighters "Weapon Training & Specialization" until at least level 11 or so.

A Ranger also has the option of selecting the TWF style and he or she does not have to meet the DEX pre-reqs for the feat chain - meaning they can pump their STR or CON or any other stat higher then a comparable fighter would.

A Ranger also gets 6 skill point per level and can take arcetypes that will give them Trap Finding.

If she wants to maximize her damage output look at Ranger/Fighter/Paladin. The bonus feat from being Human is always a nice bonus too!

If she wants to be a Rogue I think the Scout arcetype also stacks with Knifemaster and should present her more opportunities to sneak attack.

There is also a trait called "River Rat" that gives +1 bonus to damage with daggers - she could ask her GM to rule it applues to Kukri's instead... If she did all her chores without complaint for 1 week I'd probably allow it.

Cheers!

D

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't believe it is this hard for some people to understand.

When you decide between an Attack and a Full Attack, you actually have to decide between making an Attack and a Full Attack.

If you decide to Attack (note the capital "A") you can make a move action after your first attack.

or you can choose to Full Attack by continuing with your remaining or iterative attacks and restrict yourself to a 5' step.

That's all the rule is saying.

Decide
between
an Attack
or
a Full Attack.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

There are not two-types of Full-Attack - the "Full Attack" where you get to make a move action after making your first attack is actually just an Attack.

Sczarni

Talonhawke wrote:
I am going to ask this can anyone name me any full attack action other than manyshot that locks you into a full attack from the get go?

Why? What would that accomplish? An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Manyshot requires a full attack action - that wouldn't change even if it were the only feat to "lock" you into a full attack from the get go.

There are several feats i can think of that only work on a full-attack. And has always been the case the only move you can make with a full-attack is a 5' step.

Sczarni

Thanks for moving the thread and thanks for the responses thus far.

CaroRose wrote:
I didn't necessarily create a zombie horde, but I made a few appearances of plague zombies in the chapter, and tied them to Rolth. So instead of run-of-the-mill zombies, I made exploding, plague-infested ones. Too bad only 2 of my PCs were susceptible....

This is pretty much what I'm thinking I will do.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hrothgar Rannúlfr wrote:
Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.

This is very true. What people are failing to understand is that if you "opt out" after the first attack and move instead you are taking a standard action followed by a move action.

Standard Action + Move Action does not equal "Full Attack"

Therefore you have not met the requirements of Manyshot and are not entitled to receive the benefit.

Trying to game the system by using Manyshot (as an enhanced standard action) and then employing a move action is neither RAW or RAI.

Sczarni

concerro wrote:
Are you trying to say the wording could be better or do you really think the "intent" was to allow someone to benefit from a feat that says it needs a full round action to be used with only a standard action.

Concerro; No and No.

I think I am trying to say what you are trying to say - that is;

Manyshot cannot be used to enhance a standard attack by giving the user the benefit of firing 2 arrows and being able to take a move action.

It's very clear that by Manshot's definition that it can only be used as part of a full-attack action.

AD and others appear to be trying to game the system (inadvertantly or otherwise) by invoking the general rule of "deciding between an attack or a full-attack" when the specific rule of Manyshot clearly states you can't use it with a standard action.

I think the designers have done a very good job in this instance of making that as clear as possible - if players were intended to be able to combine Many shot with a standard action & a move action it would say so in the description. It doesn't. That's also why I don't think a FAQ is even needed in this instance...

I apologize if I am neither as eloquent or as articulate as Gauss - but the way he explained it is spot on in my opinion.

Sczarni

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

^That's from the rule for "Full Attack"

Nice try though.

Sczarni

Hi Jason,

Regarding the bonus feats listed; what prerequisites are you legally allowed to ignore then? If not BAB, what is a 'normal' class or level based prerequisit?

What was your intention for the Archetype if not a miltant cleric more skilled at arms then the vanilla version?

Sczarni

No FAQ required on this one...

I have to admit I've given the Paizo authors grief in the past for ambiguity or unclear wording in rules before - but this is certainly not one of those instances.

I don't see how the rules could be made anymore clear; you may use Many shot as part of a full-attack action.

End of story.

If you want to bail on your iterative attacks that's your choice - but the only move you can legally make after applying the benefit of Many shot to your first arrow is a 5' step.

Any other interpretation is wrong. Those of you suggesting option #1 are willfully ignoring the Rules as Written.

Sczarni

I'd rule that BAB is both class and level related and therefore allow a Crusader of Sarenrae take Weapon Focus (Scimitar) at level 1...

I think that's the intent of the Archetype afterall - Sacrifice a Domain and suffer diminished Spell casting for superior (for a Cleric) Martial abbility with your Dieties favoured weapon...

The real question here is; Is it worth it?.

Sczarni

Gauss wrote:

General:

CRB p187 wrote:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Specific:

CRB p130 Manyshot wrote:
Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger’s favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.

So there are two possibilities:

1) The Specific trumps the General. Specific in this case states it is a Full-attack action in order to use the ability. Thus, the decision is already made.

2) The Specific does not trump the general. This is based on an interpretation that regardless of the specific wording it is still a single attack and thus single attack rules apply.

Personally I think this is a situation of specific trumping General. However enough leeway exists that if someone made a FAQ on this I would hit the FAQ button if only to remove people's confusion.

Adamantine Dragon: Now I have cited the rules but come up with a different interpretation.

- Gauss

^This.

And I have to say that was very well laid out Gauss. Specific trumps general is what the rules are saying and trying to say (RAW & RAI)

As a GM I have my players "declare" what feats they are applying ahead of time. When they say "I'm using Many Shot" they have decided to make a Full attack rather then an Attack (with the option to take a move action).

That player has the option to stop firing after his first shot (which consists of two arrows), but he cannot take a move or move equivalent action.

Sczarni

Just build an Archer Ranger, human of course. If you're playing in Golarion I think it's the Kelish that are "horse lords".

As others have mentioned you can skip mounted feats entirely - use your horse to make a single move with your full attack and your golden.

Tweak Lastoth's build so you take boon companion early as possible If you'd like a bad ass mount.

You could also choose the "skirmisher" archetype if you want some "tricks" that synergize well with mounts/companions. You give up a lot though - tough call.

Sczarni

AdamMeyers wrote:
I'd recommend watching Dirty Rotten Scoundrels for inspiration. It features two very distinct conmen that should give you some inspiration for how such a character could work.

^That's the first thing that came to my mind as well. There is also a Dicaprio movie that was based on a real life conman who got away with some amazing capers - so much so that I think the FBI or CIA eventually employed him. I think it was "Catch me if you can".

Sczarni

Have high wisdom character take "wisdom in the flesh" trait and then use it with disable device. No rogue necessary.

Sczarni

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Sean H wrote:
Also, I'm not sure you can give up Darkvision with Forest Walker, then get Darkvision back with Acute Darkvision. It seems to me that Acute is meant to be an addition to darkvision, not a replacement.

If that was the case Paizo should have wrote: "... Gain an additional 30 feet range to a maximum darkvision range of 90'..." or something like that.

As it stands, by RAW you can in fact give up dark vision and gain it back (but better) in this manner.

I expect this will be FAQ'd soon enough though - I am on the same page as Sean H with what I think they (the authors) were trying to accomplish with that racial trait.

Sczarni

I forgot to add that Risky Striker is only against enemies Large or bigger. So be sure to stack it with Big Game Hunter!

Sczarni

Some good stuff for halflings in the ARG that will help boost their DPR. Improved Low Blow and Risky Striker I think they're called. Risky Striker in particular. Stacks with both Power Attack & Piranha Strike and boosts damage at the same rate but instead if a penalty to hit you take penalty to AC.

Sczarni

Archers do very well in combat. With the material available in the APG & UC you can be an archer that mixes it up in the thick of melee with your ranged attack.

Being that Perception is WIS based, the natural fit for a perceptive archer is the Zen Archer. Not only do you get Perception as a class skill you get to base your ranged attacks off WIS by level 2 or 3 (can't recall at the moment).

A magic headband is going to serve double duty for this character - pumping his perception and combat ability.

Your WIS can become so obscene you may want to consider the trait "wisdom in the flesh" (I think that's the name of it) that lets you use your WIS mod on any DEX/CON/STR based skill. Stealth, acrobatics, and disable device would all be good choices and all of a sudden you are way better at more things out of combat.

The Zen Archer is so blessed with feats and class features that replace or replicate feats you can actually be a non-human race and not suffer for it. Dark vision anyone?

Sczarni

Instead of trying to negate the gunslinger why not take him out of his element? A simple invisibility spell on a Tetori Monk to facilitate a grapple should do it. Make him have to fight with a light weapon instead of his gun. The grappler can be a mook - he just has to delay the GS long enough for the rest of the party to deal with the BBEG.

1 to 50 of 260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.