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

DrDeth's page

4,796 posts. 18 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 4,796 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Coriat wrote:
andreww wrote:

I have to wonder what all these buff spells that you are casting during combat are which are worth the standard action?

Our party bard left a bit ago so there's going to be some reshuffling, but previously the most common buff spells cast on another PC or the group using an actual in-combat action were (in rough order of frequency as far as I can remember):

good hope, gallant inspiration, saving finale, haste, heal, heroic finale.

I would say about half those are of notable concern to a superstitious barbarian. Now, 2/3 of them are bard-only, you may note, so perhaps of much less concern to a barbarian in a different party. I think it would certainly be fair to say that a bard in the party changes the Superstitious question in a way that no other class does.

Right. Also Tport or DD for when you have to beat a emergency retreat.BLESSING OF FERVOR. DELAY POISON. AIR BUBBLE. RESIST ENERGY, COMMUNAL (which is often cast in combat once you learn they have a nasty elemental attack)

The various Cure & healing spells.

But yes, I agree, we have Bards. Bards change things.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:

That could go on for a while, but long story short, if skills had the kind of quadratic growth that we've seen in a lot of fantasy culture and that spells have by default, a lot of the discrepancies would be resolved.

Right. While I don't buy into the whole martial/caster disparity issue (at least at commonly played levels) I 100% agree I'd like to see skills scale better. The Skill tricks from 3.5 would be nice as well as stuff like the Lorecall spells (but make them feats).

I want to see something very special kick in at 10 ranks. Hmm, to make them mix with PF as written how about when you get 10 ranks in a skill you get a Ki point and free access to a related Ki talent? Gliding Steps* with Acrobatics.

Spider Step with Climb.

* the qinggong monk Ki ability here, which yes, grants the feat if you burn a Ki point.

Fromper wrote:

I min/max stats a little more than the OP, even going so far as probably going angelkin aasimar *hangs head in shame*. I know, I know - I feel a little cheesy doing it. But it does fit well, both mechanically and for fluff. Here's what I'm thinking for stats:

Str: 18 (10, +2 racial)
Dex: 10
Con: 14 (5)
Int: 12 (2)
Wis: 7 (-4)
Cha: 17 (7, +2 racial)

Please read back and note that several of us have argued strongly that dumping WIS is a very bad idea.

Yep, perception.

OP, you make a point- Escape Artist is a skill where you either MAX it like heck or skip it.

But Dual Minded is likely better than adaptability. It's even better than Iron Will.

voska66 wrote:

Paladin's dump stat is Wisdom. They have a Good Wil save and Divine Grace at 2nd level. At an 8 he have a +5 will save at 2nd level. That's not too shabby for 2nd level and it just goes up from there. I'd be more worried about the 10 dex and poor reflex save.

Meh. Paladins have plenty of HP. Failing a Reflex save just means burning a LOH. Failing a Will save means you either sit out the combat or attack your own party.

Until you make every Will save on a 2, there's no such thing as a "too high" Will save.

I don't see a question here. Other than the rare mix of Bbn and bard it makes no difference. We all agree that it doesn't matter in many cases what your Performance skill # is, right? That a higher skill doesn;t help, right?

We agree that you must be "performing" i.e. making noise or dancing or something, right? Must be audible or visible, right?

Lemmy wrote:

But Fighter is a deeply flawed and extremely limited class. .

In your opinion.

I have several issues with this comparo, and one is Superstition. It's highly situational and varies by group. If a group likes to use lots of in combat buff spells, and has longer combats where healing will be necessary, Superstition is a trap.

In any case, Superstition has bad stuff to go along with the good. Just counted the Good is not fair.

We run it exactly like that, so yeah, no problemo. RAW does not say, but RAI seems to go with what you say, otherwise what use would it be?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chyrone wrote:

Carnival of tears, my fighter crits a brownie and got the privilege to describe in detail what it looked like.

I crited a brownie just a while ago, it was served with vanilla ice cream and delicious. ;-)

Demoyn wrote:

So you've NEVER had a rogue, or a sorcerer with bluff, or a barbarian that uses intimidate (torture) as a means to extract information from prisoners, or a diviner that figures out the enemy before you have the proof to break into his house, or..... any NUMBER of other prototypical character concepts that don't mesh with a paladin's code? Congratulations. You have an atypical gaming group. That makes your statement completely unhelpful for a vast majority of gaming groups, and downright offensive for a PFS discussion.

Rogues are fine, Bards can bluff and lie all they want to (But my Paladin can't), Intimidate is not an issue until you actually start torturing (which is Evil), and Divination spells are certainly no issue.

And, your last statement is rather egocentric.

So, let me tell you this (other than a couple of one shots where we actually had a evil guy in the party with a paladin for a quick one day quest) no, not in my forty years of gaming has the party had to conceal things from the Paladin. And that's been with dozens of groups, not just one. And TOZ is a very experienced gamer, who is one of the most respected posters on this board (altho sure, we disagree sometimes). So there's two of us- who is "atypical" then? "Vast Majority"? Really?

Michael Smith 978 wrote:

With that many points, the only way I could make a character that was battle effective in my designated role as party tank and that was to take a hit to one of those stats.

Here's your build:

STR- 16 (14+2 human)
DEX- 10
CON- 15
INT- 10
WIS- 8
CHA- 16

Simple, that 15 in CON is useless. Take those two points, and you can have your WIS back to 10.

Demoyn wrote:

On top of that, you're still not giving respect to the fact that a typical party needs to be able to trick the paladin so they can accomplish goals without being hindered by his paladin code. That ALONE is reason to dump wisdom into the dirt.

"Typical" party? Nope, we don't play that way.

David Bowles wrote:
Well, from examining the thread carefully, it appears that summoner is the hands down favorite, with gunslinger number two. I understand the reasoning behind the summoner, I just don't understand why animal companions get a free pass from the posting community.

You have ONE companion, which is not infinitely customizable. Eidolons are also way more powerful than animal companions.

But let's not say "a free pass"- in games with 6+ players, some rule no companions, and every experienced DM sez that if you have one, you must know it's stats and don't drag out your turn.

A Druid also doesn't get bonus standard action summonings. It doesn't seem like a big deal- Std action vs one round, but it is. After the Eidolon is dead, a Summoner can & will spam Monster Summoning like crazy.

Good blog, Tark.

This point: "The Caster-Martial Partnership

Martials do not so much protect and screen for their casters as simply exist as living battlefield control capable of finishing a fight. These same martials make excellent targets for buffs that increase their capacity to control the field and destroy the opponent."

is what I have been saying all along. Actually, I'll say it stronger- there is no real Caster-Martial disparity in a team that understands this point.

Yes, no doubt that a Wizard with Fly has more options- but one of the best options is to cast Fly on the martial PC. 4 wizards with Fly are not more useful than one wizard with Fly.

Blaster-casters are one of the worst caster options. Battlefield control and buffing are much better. Let the martial kill the bad guy- you're better than that.

Sure for some players, playing the martial is boring, no doubt. But other players hate playing casters and want to do DPR. This is the great thing about PF & D&D- so many options.

Ssalarn wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
archmagi1 wrote:

Ranger: MADDEST of the MAD classes (Pal's too, but they're funner). CLR is bad with 3 MAD's, but ranger needs 4 if he's gonna be ranged!

Well, nigh everyone needs CON, and yes, Rangers need Dex & STR. Wis, yes, you can't dump, I'd want a 12.

You can dump CHA and Int only needs a 10.

But the same could be said of just about any martial class, except the Paladin, who can't dump CHA, and only needs a 10 in Wis.

Cleric to me has only two - WIS & CHA. (Other than Con, which nearly every class needs).

I always thought Ranger and Paladin were two of the least MAD of the martial classes. Paladin gets heavy armor, swift action self-healing, and adds CHA to saves so he really only needs STR and CHA, and the Ranger's ability to skip prereqs can be really helpful in reducing the important of either STR or DEX to his build.

Cleric is the one that I always think of as MAD because I always want them to have enough STR and CON to wear medium armor and swing a weapon, as well as good CHA and WIS, but I suppose they're really just one of those classes where they can do so much you need to take a deep breath, pick two, and focus on that.

True, but we were talking archer builds, some folks like pally archers, and then they need DEX, and some str.

But yeah, a basic Pally can max out CHA, put a decent # (14? 16? later 18) in STR, and a 12 in CON, not dump others and is good to go. I suppose a 12 DEX and maybe Dodge is good in games where you might face a lot of touch attacks.

Right about clerics, you have casters, channelers and melee. Caster & Channelers are a different cleric than melee.

In find that as soon as the cleric can cast mid- level spells, the caster is best. Leave the melee to the BBn.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Same here with the Warlock.

Nothing was easier to pass to the newer player who wanted to "blast it magic", than the Warlock.

You can do this now with the Thundercaller Bard.

archmagi1 wrote:

Ranger: MADDEST of the MAD classes (Pal's too, but they're funner). CLR is bad with 3 MAD's, but ranger needs 4 if he's gonna be ranged!

Well, nigh everyone needs CON, and yes, Rangers need Dex & STR. Wis, yes, you can't dump, I'd want a 12.

You can dump CHA and Int only needs a 10.

But the same could be said of just about any martial class, except the Paladin, who can't dump CHA, and only needs a 10 in Wis.

Cleric to me has only two - WIS & CHA. (Other than Con, which nearly every class needs).

Summoners, hands down.

I personally don't care for guns in a Fantasy setting but the Gunslinger class is OK.

Rûmlin, Dwarven Barrister wrote: have a special ability to automatically make a Will save to avoid posting something you know is going to be contentious and post something a Wisdom check tells you might be funny instead.

Not to say that the Wisdom check will be successful and that it actually will be funny (or less contentious than what you avoided posting), but still, you *tried*.

I seem to always fail that Will save....

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kajehase wrote:
Could be Polish or Czech too.

But not Hawaiian. ;-)

You know, we should get the Welsh and Hawaiians together!

It's so sad seeing Welsh children sing "Old MacDonald" and get to the E-I-E-I-O part....

Lenthalia wrote:

I've got a 5 intelligence Demon-Spawn Tiefling I'm going to be using in PFS. Now, since it's PFS, I could in most cases simply ignore my intelligence, as it has no effect in PFS outside of skill points and other direct numerical things.

However, I don't want to do this, and would actually like to make something fun out of the fact that my character is mentally challenged.

Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.


For Golarion, this is incorrect. About one NPC in six has a Int of 8, other than a few set-pieces, that's the lowest. In other words, folks in Golarion are NOT rolled 3d6 but use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) or Elite array.

Now, as far as acting stupid, this gets very old, very quick. Suitable for a Toon! game, but not D&D.

Also, they may be folks at your table that will be offended by this.

Well, we had excellent luck with the Zen archer.

The Qinggong monk really works well. Take a few things to boost your ki.

25 pts should give you a decent monk.

Who else is in the party? The Sensei (for example) can replace a Bard on some levels.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
zylphryx wrote:
Conman the Bardbarian wrote:
zylphryx wrote:
TOZ wrote:
That Gruumash is pretty awesome, I hear.

Gruumash ., TOZ. Gruumash ..

Why do I feel like I am typing out some weird variant on Morse code?

Too many vowels for you?

Where have I seen you before?

Vowels are a figment of your imagination ... they serve no purpose other than to make words pronounceable.

You're Welsh!?! ;-)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Secret Wizard wrote:

4. ALIGNMENT RESTRICTION Biggest turn-off there is. All deities want their champion, why are there just LG paladins?

There' are plenty of them: Inquisitors can be any alignment. Some Cavaliers. Some Rangers. Warrior-priests. Some clerics. Some oracles. The Anti-paladin.

Why does a holy warrior have to be NAMED Paladin? Paladin is the name for the LG Holy Warrior.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Many great posters here, even if I often disagree.

First the Staff:
James Jacobs
Sean K. Reynolds & Ross Byers (they still post even tho not working FT with Paizo)
Jessica Price
Mark Seifter & the PDT.

I hope I didn't miss anyone?

Treatmonk (Great guides, but I wish he wouldn't dump so much!)
Tacticslion (long winded but fun)
Deathquaker (a voice of reason)
Cheapy (super helpful)
Mark Hoover
RavingDork ...well, sometimes ;-)
Experiment 626 (Stitch!)
Thomas Long
Captain K
Peter Stewart
Joe M.
Bob Loblaw

There are also a few posters who have moments of genius but get too personal when disagreed with. You guys know who you are. So, I respect your useful posts and brilliance, but wish you wouldn't make so much work for Chris, Liz & Sara. Not going to name names here.

Mind you, I often argue too strenuously, so mea culpa and get off my lawn!!

Hmm, the Hexblade was a rather cool idea. This could be done by a Magus with hexes instead of spells.

Zhayne wrote:


4e's Warlord was my most favorite class ever. I could literally play one of those every game for the rest of my life and love every second of it.

Cool class indeed. So was the Invoker.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
swifthunter420 wrote:
that is a good question im not sure what im gonna take yet i might jump human for bonus feat and take point blank shot. how many do you get its none right unless you get bonus by class or race right?

Right. It's kind a toss up. With Human you get two feats. With Half-elf you get one feat and one other which is fixed as either Skill Focus (meh) or +2 to Will saves (slightly better that Iron will since it stacks)

But Half-elf gets Low light vision. That could be very nice as a scout.

Also these:"Elven Immunities: Half-elves are immune to magic sleep effects and get a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells and effects.

Keen Senses: Half-elves receive a +2 racial bonus on Perception skill checks."

Aren't bad at all. Yes, Humans get one extra SkP per level, but that +2 to perception is better for the first few levels.

And that +2 vs enchantments and Dual Minded will make up for poor Will saves for a while.

Do take PB shot. Then PA, then Precise shot.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
swifthunter420 wrote:

and stats are

str 13
we are using 15 point buil

Hmm, that's only 14 pts (I assume you start with 14 in DEX then bump it to 16 with your racial bonus) and Rangers can get by with only a 10 in INT.

str 14

str 14

swifthunter420 wrote:
i got 7 point i took survival perception stealth knowledge nature i put in each nature

Good choices.

Remember you also get one extra pt for favored class, but I'd suggest putting that in Hit points.

You get adaptability racial trait= skill focus as a half-elf, put that in Perception. Unless-
However, "Dual Minded: The mixed ancestry of some half-elves makes them resistant to mental attacks. Half-elves with this racial trait get a +2 bonus on all Will saving throws. This racial trait replaces the adaptability racial trait."

That would be better. Will Saves are weak in Rangers.

Will you get Traits?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, then you have either Bard, magus or Sorcerer.

I like the Starsoul bloodline, since you dont need a blaster.

The Magician Bard could be fun.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want a druidic caster a little like the 3.5 Spirit Shaman who cast druid spells, but does't shape shift or have a animal companion.

Maybe a oracle subtype?

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Artanthos wrote:
Have fun spending days at a time sitting in town after every fight.

Yep. Maybe find another game?

Captain K. wrote:

For points which could be spent on Cha.

But he didn't- he spent it on getting Con from 14 to 15, which is meh, and even if he did, the two points gained back would not increase the 16 at all.

Wasum wrote:
I'd skip all the channeling and healing stuff as I do not think its worth it at all. PF-Mechanics do not support ingame healing, espacially by cure spells and channeling.

This is something that varies highly by table. At our tables, and at the Devs own table, Healing during combat is a regular thing and critical. In other games- not so much.

So, if in the Op's games, combat goes on for some time, and in combat healing has become important, then yes, Selective Channel is a great feat, and we use it a lot. The OP would do well by picking several channel feats.

The OP also has a larger than 4 person party, so the effects of Channeling are magnified.

OP with three tanks in your party, I would concentrate on spellcasting. Buff spells.

Those heavy armors will also slow you down and cut heavily into skill checks.

TriOmegaZero wrote:
And then your Wis-based skills are worthless. Not worth it for me.

Yes, and Perception is THE most rolled skill in the game. Sense Motive can be really bad to blow.

And even tho a Pally has great Will saves, there's nearly always room for better, since being Dominated and attacking your own party isn't very fun, nor is sitting out a whole combat.

And for what?

GypsyMischief wrote:

These days the concept of in-combat healing is somewhat out dated, being that combats go by very quickly. The generally accepted method for maintaining one's HP is having a UMD b&@%# to use a wand of Cure Light Wounds on everyone. You have a few options here

This is heavily dependent upon the table. At our table at at the Devs own games, combats last 6 rounds or so and in combat healing is a must have.

Other tables differ, and that's fine. But I'd guess that newbs wont have the super optimized rocket tag PC's that can bring down a std PF AP encounter in 2-3 rounds.

However, the paladin is a great source of healing, he can use a wand (as can the Ranger)or just take a archetype (Hospitaler) or feats for extra healing.

The rogue can also use a wand, if he has UMD. So that's three PC's who can use a wand of CLW, that's fine.

But yes, toss a wand of CLW at them, sure.

There's one advantage to all martials vs a spellcaster. If they rush him, it takes a pretty powerful wizard to stop four guys all bent of smashing his head in.

Make sure no one dumps WIS and Iron Will might be on everyones list (except the pally).

Heck, you might even just give them one of the +1 to will saves traits as a bonus trait. It's certainly well within the purview of a DM and it's hardly unbalancing.

SAMAS wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Chromnos wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
He put its AC in there, 29. With very little investment in temporary resources spent. With a buffing Summoner and a few rejuvenate eidolon spells, I sure that eidolon will survive much better than a same level Fighter.

Want to kill the eidolon? Target the summoner.

The Summoner has a D8 hit die, light armor, and good saves through Shield Ally.

It also requires a degree of metagaming from the enemy. Mindless/hungry creatures go for whats in front of them. Even intelligent opponents likely have no idea that the creature is bound to one of your party members.

Matching glowing runes might be a bit of a giveaway.
My argument assumes you don't have a -3 intelligence and know to wear a hat or scarf to cover it.
See the glowing rune on the weird monster? Kill the dude hanging back with the funny hat.

Summoners are pretty rare in Golarion.

Ashiel wrote:

1. The Paladin repeatedly broke his code, but never in a way that should make a Paladin fall.

We agree the Paladin should not have fallen, we do not agree he broke the Code by RAW.

Simon Legrande wrote:

Start with the existing Paladin class, then:

1. Change the alignment requirement to N
2. Replace every instance of the word "evil" with the word "neutral"
3. In the now Smite Neutral ability, change "undead creature" to "elemental"
4. Change the code wording to "Code of Conduct: A "paladin" must be of neutral alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an extreme good or evil act."

There, done.

So a Holy Warrior of Neutrality now Smites his own alignment?!?

"Stop hitting yourself!" ;-)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Except if he leaves now without making the promise then they die when its completely within his power to stop it and if he comes back later and attacks after making the promise then he lied.

It's not within his power. It's the orc's choice, not the paladins.

And since the orc is clearly crazy and evil, there's no saying the the orc won;t kill them anyway.

Look "Do something evil or I kill this puppy" doesn't make a Paladin fall, it never has.

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
EntrerisShadow wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Lets alter that slightly. Your paladin is recognizably a paladin, and its known in this world paladin's cant lie. Orc orders him to promise to leave, not engage in any hostile actions against them, or tell anyone else about the encampment of orcs and humans.

Actually, that seemed pretty ironclad, but then I realized that the Orc never said leave and don't come back.

Step 1: Leave.

Step 2: Find some Rogues (Lawful, of course!), Rangers, or whatever other sneaky-stealthy types float your boat. Heck, if this is a small settlement in the middle of the woods then a Druid would work with its trackless step. Maybe a Wizard for added Invisibility goodness.

Step 3: Tell them about somebody who needs saving, say that on your honor you cannot divulge all the details - suffice it to say, it'll be dangerous, but it is ultimately for a good cause and you will reward them to the best of your ability. I imagine if there's a good aligned Ranger or Wizard around, they would trust the word of a Paladin.

Step 4: Sneak back in, spirit away a few of the hostages. (They are held illegally so there's no violation of law by taking them.) Bring those hostages to the nearest large city settlement and let them tell the city guard about what's happening.

Heck, even if he did say never come back you could rig a fairly airtight plan without accompanying your associates.

Except you would have lied because you told people about the humans, which he told you not to do. You told someone there were people up there in need of saving. That's breaking your oath not to tell anyone about the encampment of orcs and humans. So you fall, for breaking your promise and telling someone.

Why do you make that oath? Just leave.

And, actually you can lie to evil in the cause of greater good.

Ashiel wrote:

I didn't say the system was fatally broken. In fact, I said I like Paladins. I've been GMing for a great Paladin for quite a while. However, a large part of the reason the game has been going so smoothly is because I threw out all the mechanics for the code and such, because they don't work unless you don't follow them.

So then, you have no idea whether or not the RAW code actually cause issues as you don't play with the RAW, but then you blithely dismiss our IRL gaming experiences where we say the RAW does not cause issues at our tables?

At our tables, and apparently at the Devs own tables, the RAW code does not cause issues.

Ashiel wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Mavael wrote:

>f I want role-play a paladin how I want, I would also have to enforce my view of right and wrong on the GM.

Can you give an example?

Paladins can never willfully commit an evil act. Doesn't matter how minor. That means if I do anything I think is fine but my GM thinks is evil I fall/have a long discussion about morals that probably ends up with me leaving the table(example in thread. I think it's fine not to listen to hostage takers. Plenty of people don't agree with that and think it is a reckless action to take with the lives of the hostages).
If the paladin doesn't know its an evil act, then they aren't willfully committing an evil act. Willfully committing implies that you know its evil but do it anyway.
You're thinking of "knowingly". Willfully merely implies agency.
No. I know exactly what I am saying, if you don't knowingly kill someone, you may be guilty of something, but it isn't murder. If you don't know its outcomes are going to be evil, then you are not willingly doing an evil act; you are not choosing to do something evil in full knowledge that is what you are doing.

You did choose to do the act that happened to be evil. You willfully did the act. You did not willfully commit evil, but the act you did do was evil. Therefore you willfully commited an evil act even though you did not willfuly commit evil.

The paladin's code has little to do with actual morality or alignment. That is one of its problems.

Except for the fact that the paladins code as a whole entity doesn't exist.

All that exists is a broad summary of things it contains.
Bad rules are bad.

Not trimming your replies- is bad.

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

I'm sorry that an actual example from a game produced by wizards of the coast is a straw man. I'm also sorry that the paladin is not given any lee way in his code is a straw man.

The example isn't a straw man. The paladin Falling is the false part. As we have said he can make offers "Let then go and I'll let you live" He can come back later with more force, and a spellcaster who can put the arrow out. If he tries but the peasants die, then he doesn't fall, but yes, he must try and get revenge.

Let me make that clear- if he tries his best but the orc kills the peasants, the paladin doesn't fall.

Yes, that's a horrible sitrep for a paladin, but it doesn't cause him to fall.

Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Mavael wrote:

>f I want role-play a paladin how I want, I would also have to enforce my view of right and wrong on the GM.

Can you give an example?

Paladins can never willfully commit an evil act. Doesn't matter how minor. That means if I do anything I think is fine but my GM thinks is evil I fall/have a long discussion about morals that probably ends up with me leaving the table(example in thread. I think it's fine not to listen to hostage takers. Plenty of people don't agree with that and think it is a reckless action to take with the lives of the hostages).

It's true with a new DM you shoudl discuss this ahead ot time.

And just buy a Phylactery. 100% proof vs unintentional fail.

Versatile Weapon spell does it.

Your also not reading what a "Lie of Omission" is by the defination. Hint- not saying anything at all, or giving a Platitude is not a "lie by omission" is saying something and omitting a critical part:

"Hows the drive train?" "The Engine is in great shape!" is a lie if the Transmission is shot. But "The car is sold as is" is not a lie.

So far you guys got nuttin.

Ashiel wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
The star wars example is a great one. You control your actions and they control their actions. If they say they will do X if you do Y and you do Y you are not guilty of X.

You're right. You're not guilty of murdering the hostages, but if you didn't try to protect them, you're sure as hell guilty of not trying to protect them. If you try to protect them and the BBEG murders them anyway, you're in the clear, but if you didn't, you broke your code, Paladin falls.

Protecting is not part of the Code. "and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."

1 to 50 of 4,796 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.