|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Lord Gadigan wrote:
These are what I was going to suggest with the addition of the Golem/Construct Summoner being Int based.
Actually, as has been mentioned several times, in Pathfinder an Int of 4 makes you The Villiage Idiot.
I didn't say that and I don't play in your games.
Except they aren't really for mental stats. Sure if you want to know if you are strong enough to lift a box, there's a chart you can check; stomach a poison, there's a DC for that; conceive of a plan, that's just a judgement call.
This is not to say I agree with other people telling someone how to roleplay, but I understand their frustration. I would be annoyed by someone role playing their four Int as an eighteen Int, just as I would be at someone describing their gnome as a half-orc.
Heavy Shield (+2 shield), Shield Focus (+3), Greater Shield Focus (+4), +5 enhancement (+9), Improved Shield Bash and +5 Defending Shield (+14)
You can get pretty close with just one.
The village idiot can be a simple commoner or stable boy, not all commoners or stable boys have a four Intelligence. Sure you could explain to someone, follow, open cell, then hide the key, but would you expect the village idiot to come up with that plan on his own.This isn't a discussion on what a four Int can learn to do, but what can that person come up with on their own.
Just to add...Does it change your stance that Hobby Lobby was factually wrong, and none of the birth control methods caused an abortion by the scientific definition? How about the fact that three of the four did not qualify based on Hobby Lobby's definition of abortion?
You do realize your uncle and his friends paid into unemployment while they were employed, right? And then, after they lost their job through no fault of their own, reaped the benefits of unemployment insurance. Their situation would not have happened in the 1800s because after they lost their job, they would have starved and died penniless in the streets. Their families too. Their foreclosed homes would have brought down everyone's property value and the local stores would have all closed because no one had money to buy things. That's what you want to go back to? I don't think you know what a social contract is.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
What Sohei get at 6th level is Weapon Training. That's it.
Wrong. Look again.
Sohei Weapon Training wrote:
Weapon Training (Ex): At 6th level, a sohei gains weapon training in one of the following weapon groups, as the fighter class feature: bows, crossbows, monk weapons, polearms, spears, or thrown weapons. He may select an additional group of weapons for every six levels after 6th, to a maximum of three at 18th level. A sohei may use flurry of blows and ki strike with any weapon in which he has weapon training. This ability replaces purity of body, diamond body, quivering palm, timeless body, and tongue of sun and moon.
They get weapon training and the ability to use flurry and Ki strike with any weapon in which he has weapon training. It's listed in the class ability they get at 6th level. You get that class ability at 6th level, not before.
Primary and off hands is a matter if effort, not physical hands. Your "off hand" could be your left hand, either foot, a headbutt, or a hip check if you wanted. Think of it this way: you can make an unarmed strike even if your hands are full. So you have two daggers, your primary dagger deals 1x Str damage, and your off hand deals .5x Str. Can you also kick, or headbutt, etc.? With a two handed weapon, or a one handed weapon in two hands, you require your primary and off hand deal 1.5x Str damage. Can you also kick or headbutt, etc.?
It's in th CRB, there's a FAQ, I don't know what more you need (or why it's my job to provide it). You asked, I've tried to explain. Run it as you wish. You said you were the GM.
If you're talking alchemist, you do not gain either extra primary hands or off hands.If you're referring to a natural three (or more) armed race, then you get extra off hands but not extra primary hands.
Again, these are the rules as they are. If you are the GM, then change them however you want. I am not in any way trying to say it would be overpowered or broken.
You must have a different book than I. Mine says "Two hands are required to use a twohanded melee weapon effectively." CRB pg 141 How are two off hands NOT two hands as per the core rule book?
Well I do have a second printing. (Light hearted emoticon) I simply read in context. The "two hands" refer to the primary and off hands mentioned in the same passage. Otherwise it's stating "two handed weapons require two hands." I could have figured that out myself.
Quoted it several times.CRB pg 141
Light weapon: primary Or off hand
One-handed: primary Or off hand
Two-handed: Both primary And off hand.
But they do not gain any extra "primary" or "off hands"
A two handed weapon requires a primary and off hand, not two off hands.
Yo' momma's so weak, she has to track encumbrance.
I'm sorry I just don't understand this. You know what the rules are, regardless of how vague or complicated they might be. What do you hope to gain by intentionally confusing people asking for clairification?
No, it says both hands. Referring to the previously mentioned primary hand and off hand.
The rule is easily changeable if you don't like it. I see no reason to try to confuse the issue after a lengthy discussion that lead to a FAQ. The rule is clear. Use it or don't.
Ah, then Toss all that [blank] out the door and kick while you use a greatsword then (heck, use armor spikes too and ignore the FAQ). I take a very dim view of having a ruling based on unwritten rules.
The rule that two-handed weapons require your off-hand is in the book. CRB pg 141
Edit: but, yes, ignore it if you want to. I do in my home games.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
So a scenario from a video game, specifically altered to screw over the paladin, who is once again alone...
Why is the paladin consistently in these situations? How often does "lie or I'll kill them" come up?
So just appease the bullies?
I know that was probably just an off hand comment meant to point out why you dislike the paladin (or the code) but I see it a lot in threads dealing with paladins. "I don't like paladins because the people who play them are jerks!" Well, don't play with jerks. "I don't like paladins because when I play one other people are jerks!" Well, don't play with jerks.
If your friend wanted to play a female character but the people he played with were sexist and gave him crap, would you say don't play a female?
Why is someone being a jerk because of paladins okay but being a jerk for some other reason okay? Why not, don't play with jerks?