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

Durngrun Stonebreaker's page

3,073 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,073 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Well, killing is amoral, too.

Just don't mention gun control. Those guys get touch attacks, man.

You can have my touch attack when you pry it from my cold dead hands.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm bewildered at the thought that losing the right to discriminate against a group of people is somehow "oppression."


Yea to all. It's non-lethal, who cares.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Yuugasa wrote:

How can same sex marriage being legal be used as a club against religious groups?

I was going to talk improvised weapons, but the Constitution isn't really that heavy.

Scrollmaster


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No don't take them early in the day. That's when I go to avoid people in general.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I keep trying to take my oldest kid to the movies and she always wants to play outside. I just don't understand this younger generation.


How would this FAQ affect the Beastmorph alchemist?


The complaints I've seen about Sleep being overpowered tended to focus more on coup de grace then prone or disarm.


CalethosVB wrote:
Cavall wrote:
Class is class.

We're talking about class features. Are your class skills considered class features? If so, are your BAB, saving throws progression, and hit die size also considered class features? I think not. They are considered part of the class package, but aren't features of the class. Do monsters with skill ranks and class skills count those as class features? If so, do they count as having a character class because they have a class feature?

But, no, class skills are not class features. They are inherent to all classes and creatures and as such are not a "feature". The class skills selected are part of the class package, but not considered "class features".

So if two archetypes changed a class's hit die size or BAB, would they be allowed to stack?


Salt shot


I have to wonder if Aelryinth really believes in his position or if this is just his way of attacking the armor spikes FAQ.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've still have yet to see any rule or FAQ that even implies you lose your shield bonus because you made an attack that doesn't involve your shield hand.

Considering you can TWF with your shield and not lose your shield bonus (at the cost of a feat), I don't see how this can be considered overpowered.


Shields don't require a "hand of effort," weapons do.

You lose the AC bonus of a buckler if you use a weapon in that hand because you have used that physical arm. Similar to being unable to use a manufactured weapon and natural weapon with the same arm.

The amount of effort required to use weapons is listed here and in the CRB pg 141. There is no similar language regarding shields that I am aware of.


Nefreet wrote:

According to the recent 900+ post discussion on the matter, Acrobatics is used for "obstacle avoidance".

You're not actually jumping, you're more like teleporting, and continuing your movement as you were before.

So, whether you're clearing a 100ft pit or walking up to a wall, the DC to climb it would be the same.

Eschew real life comparisons.

Don't be that guy, Nefreet. You're better than that.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If Captain America surviving a blast from Ultron ruined the movie for you, then you were trying to not like it.


I've never heard the term min-max outside of the internet.


wraithstrike wrote:
bookrat wrote:

I think it's more that people believe that choosing a low score from point buy is "intentional" min-maxing, whereas getting unlucky with a low stat and just placing it just dealing with an unlucky roll. After all, you started with a 10 and didn't have to choose to lower it.

Now, I'm not saying this makes sense, it's just the feeling I get from those who argue for your question.

That is what I am getting too. I guess I will have to agree to disagree with them on this one.

How does it not make sense? Can you truly not see the difference in getting a benefit and not getting a benefit?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Olympians A and B have a jumping contest.

Olympian A gets a 20 on their Acrobatics check, and lands 4 squares away.

Olympian B has a 15ft pit dug, and gets a 15 on their Acrobatics check to jump over it, landing in the same square as Olympian A.

Does that make any sense to anyone?

No, of course not. Ergo, Olympian B's Acrobatics check fails to jump over the pit.

Plenty of people refuted it. No one refuted it to your satisfaction.

Distance moved is not equal to distance jumped.

A covers 20' with his jump leaving the ground slightly before the pit and landing well beyond it but still in the next square. He moved a total of 20'.

B covers 15' with his jump, leaving the ground at the edge of the pit and landing just past the lip of the pit, stepping into the next square. He also moved a total of 20'.

(Both of them also needed 10' of space to get a running start, so they used a total of 30' of movement.)

You're changing the variables.

A and B have the same starting point. Leave "edges", "centers" and "middles" out of this.

A's check gets them 4 squares away.
B's check gets them 4 squares away, but only when a pit is placed there.

How does that make sense?

If you're leaving "edges, centers, and middles" out of the answer. Why not leave out "squares?"


3 people marked this as a favorite.

With point buy you receive a benefit for intentionally lowering an ability you don't need. There is a difference between lowering your Cha to 7 in order to max out your Int and putting a rolled 7 into Cha because that 7 has to go somewhere.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For the record, I didn't click FAQ because this is dumb.


Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Yes, people keep saying I'm adding 5ft, and that their method is "simple and straightforward".

Likewise I keep saying they're subtracting 5ft and that my method is "simple and straightforward".

10 foot pit 10 foot DC. The equation literally can't get easier than an equals sign.

15 foot distance 15 foot DC. The equation literally can't get easier than an equals sign.

My position is supported by the number of squares you are moving your figurine on the grid.

Which isn't something you think about while moving. If you're looking at the map, you see two lines X distance apart and a plunging valley deep below. The game will describe an X foot wide pit. People think of it as an X foot wide pit. Even you're describing it as an x foot wide pit , not an obstacle which is required to be traversed with x +5 feet.

I'm a very visual person (though I know everyone says that).

I don't see it as "x + 5 feet".

I see it as "x squares moved".

Quit thinking about it in terms of squares and you're golden.

Let me ask you this, if one player wants to take an action outside of combat, do you still roll initiative?

Edit: To put it another way, you say the grid is an abstraction, why are you forcing the grid into the question/your answer?


It really grinds my gears that the Stupid, Stupid Threads thread didn't take off.


This is the dumbest thread I've read since the fighter bonus feats thread. Please carry on.


When the post that compared me to Hitler (for saying humans don't have tails in Pathfinder) was allowed to stand, I quit flagging any posts.


Natural weapons are handled differently than manufactured weapons. When you make a full attack you can use all your natural attacks. Primary natural attacks are made at your highest BAB and gain your full Str bonus to dmg. Secondary natural attacks are made at your highest BAB but with a -5 penalty and only receive half your Str bonus to dmg.

The Alchemist's claws and bite from Feral Mutagen are primary natural attacks.

The Two-weapon fighting feat has no effect on natural attacks.


If you can meet the Dex requirement, look at Break Guard. With the Foehammer's 7th level ability you can disarm with your hammer, then bash with your shield, bull rush with Shield Slam, and finally, trip at the end of the bull rush.


Mulgar wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

You know, I always hear people ask, "how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

My question, If they can't chuck wood, why do we call them a woodchuck!?

Edited to be funnier.

The word "woodchuck" is a misinterpretation of their Native American name "wuchak", which roughly translates as "the digger".

Not funny at all, but true.

I'm still gonna keep using that joke.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If Spiked Shields don't stack with Bashing Shields, then how am I supposed to store them!?
Because as it is they are making a mess all over the forums.


You know, I always hear people ask, "how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

My question, If they can't chuck wood, why do we call them a woodchuck!?

Edited to be funnier.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Hoover wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

A kobold with a greatsword and CR 1/4 might have the same CR, but he's more dangerous. That's the whole point. Why does half of this thread think the default kobold needs to be more dangerous? Why? I really don't get this, and I feel like it's the main barrier here. Show me there's a reason for you wanting kobolds to not die. Far too keen on what and how, but not so hot on why!

Whoops. Been listening to too much JCS lately. Just kidding there's no such thing.

No, you're right of course Cleavy McKoboldpants. Some creatures were just born to die - that's the meta reason that justifies poor weapon choice and I'm ok with that for mooks. I think all of this stems from the fact that, without changing anything in the standard kobold build other than shortbows I made a gauntlet of an area in a dungeon. The kobolds were secondary; their placement in Full Cover was primary. Suddenly my players freaked saying "HOW COULD KOBOLDS HAVE SHORTBOWS YOURE THE DEVIL!!!" when I started questioning "why NOT?"

There have been a couple of in-game reasons as to their weapons choice in this thread, it just whatever you choose to accept.

(Also their stealth bonus is probably more related to sneaking away as opposed to sneaking up on.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

A kobold with a greatsword and CR 1/4 might have the same CR, but he's more dangerous. That's the whole point. Why does half of this thread think the default kobold needs to be more dangerous? Why? I really don't get this, and I feel like it's the main barrier here. Show me there's a reason for you wanting kobolds to not die. Far too keen on what and how, but not so hot on why!

Whoops. Been listening to too much JCS lately. Just kidding there's no such thing.

Oh, KC, you're are my second favorite poster.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or the kobold in the Beastiary is the average kobold, the one adventurers are most likely to run across, and a DM can change the equipment if they want something different.
Or is the idea of all kobolds not being identical just too far fetched?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not if the slaves are trying to kill you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The average kobold is certainly not a farmer.

PRD wrote:
Creatures of deep, dark places, kobolds are masters of tunneling, mining, and setting traps.
PRD wrote:


As creatures of deep caverns and shadowed forests, kobolds have difficulty with light, and even a torch is uncomfortably bright to their eyes. Hence, though they are not naturally nocturnal, they rarely venture to the surface during the day.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Did I not link the text you quoted?
One of us is clearly not understanding the other.
I find that to be 90% of forum posts.

And half the fun!


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Did I not link the text you quoted?

One of us is clearly not understanding the other.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Well, that wasn't what you quoted. Please be more specific next time.

Was it not?

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Hydromancer wrote:


PRD, Conditions, Bound wrote:
A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions.
You got a link to this? I'm not finding a "bound" condition in my CRB or the PRD.

Cause it kind of seems like it was...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, there's this.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Pinned condition.

Looking for "bound" condition. You know, exact text not rules pulled out of someone's bum.


Hydromancer wrote:


PRD, Conditions, Bound wrote:
A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions.

You got a link to this? I'm not finding a "bound" condition in my CRB or the PRD.


N N 959 wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
But at the official tables, they aren't going to stack.
I can guarantee you there are PFS GMs who will let them stack regardless of your interpretation.

It's not an interpretation, it's explicitly called out.

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Quote:
Shield Spikes: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you (see “spiked shields” on Table: Weapons). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
Quote:
Bashing: A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage). The shield acts as a +1 weapon when used to bash. Only light and heavy shields can have this ability.
Quote:

Size increases and effective size increases: How does damage work if I have various effects that change my actual size, my effective size, and my damage dice?

As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack, so if you have multiple size changing effects (for instance an effect that increases your size by one step and another that increases your size by two steps), only the largest applies. The same is true of effective size increases (which includes “deal damage as if they were one size category larger than they actually are,” “your damage die type increases by one step,” and similar language). They don’t stack with each other, just take the biggest one. However, you can have one of each and they do work together (for example, enlarge person increasing your actual size to Large and a bashing shield increasing your shield’s effective size by two steps, for a total of 2d6 damage).

Just because a PFS GM lets you cheat, doesn't mean it's not cheating.


Everyone pointing out that the FAQ does not address shield spikes and bashing are ignoring the fact that if the devs wanted them to stack, could have easily called out an exemption for shield spikes and bashing in that very same FAQ.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Quote:
Shield Spikes: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you (see “spiked shields” on Table: Weapons). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
Quote:
Bashing: A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage). The shield acts as a +1 weapon when used to bash. Only light and heavy shields can have this ability.
Quote:

Size increases and effective size increases: How does damage work if I have various effects that change my actual size, my effective size, and my damage dice?

As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack, so if you have multiple size changing effects (for instance an effect that increases your size by one step and another that increases your size by two steps), only the largest applies. The same is true of effective size increases (which includes “deal damage as if they were one size category larger than they actually are,” “your damage die type increases by one step,” and similar language). They don’t stack with each other, just take the biggest one. However, you can have one of each and they do work together (for example, enlarge person increasing your actual size to Large and a bashing shield increasing your shield’s effective size by two steps, for a total of 2d6 damage).


One side has an extensive FAQ and rules from the CRB and the other side has one guy in a book somewhere, so you can see why it's so hotly debated.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Guru-Meditation wrote:

OP is looking at the equipment from a strictly out-of-game, "i can litterally see the rules the whole world is build upon right before my very own eyes, Matrix-Style" viewpoint, and then determines a best-course of equipping oneself from the near-omniscient base.

In-game creatures do not have this view. They do not know that weapon A is objectively better then weapon B, C and D.

And that not even touching the problems of cost and availability, especially for creatures who are not professional murderhobos 24/7, every month of every year.

Most people generally assume that creatures have an intuitive understanding of the world that correlates to the numbers. It would be reasonable for a creature to understand that a scimitar frequently inflicts nasty wounds, a greataxe is quite inconsistent in the damage it inflicts compared to a greatsword, and a scythe rarely does a lot of damage but when it does...oh boy.

Weapon availability is a concern to a kobold living in a dank cave. Not so much for someone living in a city, who has about as much access to fancy weapons as the typical murder hobo adventurer.

That's assuming the creature in question has seen all of those weapons used frequently enough to draw those conclusions.
Or it's common knowledge. A soldier is quite likely to hear their instructors talk about various commonly seen weapons during training, or from veteran guards while in active service.

I'm not really sure how much instructions or training is given to kobolds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"I'm not arguing with you. I'm explaining why I'm right."


You cannot use natural attacks and flurry (you can flurry with a natural attack if you have the right feat) because of rules.

PRD wrote:
A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

Notice if you were unable to combine unarmed strikes and natural attacks period, then this line becomes redundant.

PRD wrote:
A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:
Guru-Meditation wrote:

OP is looking at the equipment from a strictly out-of-game, "i can litterally see the rules the whole world is build upon right before my very own eyes, Matrix-Style" viewpoint, and then determines a best-course of equipping oneself from the near-omniscient base.

In-game creatures do not have this view. They do not know that weapon A is objectively better then weapon B, C and D.

And that not even touching the problems of cost and availability, especially for creatures who are not professional murderhobos 24/7, every month of every year.

Most people generally assume that creatures have an intuitive understanding of the world that correlates to the numbers. It would be reasonable for a creature to understand that a scimitar frequently inflicts nasty wounds, a greataxe is quite inconsistent in the damage it inflicts compared to a greatsword, and a scythe rarely does a lot of damage but when it does...oh boy.

Weapon availability is a concern to a kobold living in a dank cave. Not so much for someone living in a city, who has about as much access to fancy weapons as the typical murder hobo adventurer.

That's assuming the creature in question has seen all of those weapons used frequently enough to draw those conclusions.


If you have Courageous then you want at least a +4 weapon in order to get the full benefit.


I think if pinned or tied up was supposed to make you helpless then that condition would be listed in the grapple rules.

1 to 50 of 3,073 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.