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

2,012 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,012 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Moving 10 feet does count as moving more than 5 feet. Two five foot steps are not the same as a double move.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:


Is an unarmed strike count as a natural or manufactured weapon?

No. It counts as both.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Ah, but Monk Unarmed Strikes only count as manufactured weapons for the purposes of spells and effects that improve natural and manufactured weapons.

Scott, "A Monk Unarmed Strike counts as both a manufactured and a natural weapon" means it still counts as both for spells and effects. It doesn't say manufactured OR natural weapon. SO even if you were right that it would let natural attacks at full BAB, it's still counting as a manufactured weapon. Nothing you've pointed out so far removes that quality from the Unarmed Strike. And since it's still a manufactured the other natural attacks take the penalty.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:


in general, class abilities are suppose to help a character, not hurt it.
Also as we're interpreting it, it still is helping him out. He can have magic fang on his hands, he can have lockjaw and strong jaw. While still having stuff that boost manufactured.

But it counts as a natural weapon for the purpose of effects that improve natural weapons. Claws and Bites are natural weapons, and forgoing the -5 penalty is an improvement.

Can you find some other rule? Because this rule is clear.

To follow up on his point: Can you find a rule that it stops counting as a manufactured weapon?


Cthulhudrew wrote:
I want a movie about the guy whose knife Drax stole.

Uh, spoilers? C'mon, man!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:


I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. Not that they really need your help to look bad.
So where are all the burned and torched cops from these cocktails? I was watching this on cnn, didn't see a single fire go up on the police side before they let loose with the heavy artillery.
CNN wrote:

More violence. More tear gas. No answers.

Stun grenades and tear gas canisters arced through the night sky and into crowds of protesters overnight in Ferguson, Missouri, after police said they had been targeted with rocks, Molotov cocktails and gunfire amid continuing demonstrations over the death of Michael Brown.
You can believe the police or not believe the police, but the fact is they're there and have a better idea of what is happening than you do. 3 or so minutes of footage from a single angle by someone who may or may not have an agenda doesn't give a comprehensive vision of rather or not the police were attacked.

Maybe if the police quit arresting journalists, we would have a clearer picture.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, an Axe-Musket is a Musket that counts as a Battleaxe, or a Battleaxe, that counts as a Musket?

How do you determine priority?

In Ultimate Combat it is listed as a two-handed firearm and the description starts "this musket..."


Sissyl wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Sissyl wrote:

Hmph. Whether you killing someone is terrible should be dependent on how much that person considers him/herself a person. Thus, kill someone who does, that's murder, standard procedure. Someone who sees him/herself only as part of a collective, well, we don't consider ourselves to be murderers for clipping our toenails.

Everything would be SO much better if we could abandon the collectivistic, primitive conditioning processes on the trash heap of history.

I don't think gunning down human beings because they took stuff will make us better.
No. Not because they took stuff. Because they consider themselves to only be part of a group.
I just think that's a very low bar for murder.
It isn't murder if the person killed is only part of a group and sees him/herself as such. We aren't murderers for clipping toenails.

What other ways if thinking should we kill people for?


Uh, Monk (Tetori) obviously. Bear hugs, man!


Globetrotter wrote:


I'm not really looking to micromanage or get in an arms race with the players. I just don't understand some items. I was thinking a lot about the ecology of certain creatures and the scare factor of darkness. Then I started thinking about economies and how if continual flame was so cheap, lights would be everywhere. I'm mean everywhere.

Cheap for adventurers, not commoners.


Sissyl wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Sissyl wrote:

Hmph. Whether you killing someone is terrible should be dependent on how much that person considers him/herself a person. Thus, kill someone who does, that's murder, standard procedure. Someone who sees him/herself only as part of a collective, well, we don't consider ourselves to be murderers for clipping our toenails.

Everything would be SO much better if we could abandon the collectivistic, primitive conditioning processes on the trash heap of history.

I don't think gunning down human beings because they took stuff will make us better.
No. Not because they took stuff. Because they consider themselves to only be part of a group.

I just think that's a very low bar for murder.


Sissyl wrote:

Hmph. Whether you killing someone is terrible should be dependent on how much that person considers him/herself a person. Thus, kill someone who does, that's murder, standard procedure. Someone who sees him/herself only as part of a collective, well, we don't consider ourselves to be murderers for clipping our toenails.

Everything would be SO much better if we could abandon the collectivistic, primitive conditioning processes on the trash heap of history.

I don't think gunning down human beings because they took stuff will make us better.


HarbinNick wrote:

-I've lived in Russia and China, and that kind of firepower has NO need being deployed on US soil unless you are dealing with a Drug Cartel. A

MINE-PROOF APV?
-At the same time, I think looters should be shot...on sight. But these pictures and images do NOT belong in the US. This isn't right...This isn't Xinjiang or Chechnya...or the DMZ.

Do you think we should execute all thieves on sight or just those caught up in a mob mentality?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:
My guess is that the officer encountered an angry and belligerent teen and decided to arrest him for... I have no idea (probably jaywalking) since he didn't know about the crimes the boy was a suspect in. As the teen was being placed in the cruiser the teen foolishly decided to fight back and at some point they struggled over the officer's weapon which was fired into the cruiser. The teen ran and in the heat of rage the officer gunned him down.

When was the last time you saw/ heard of a white teenager placed in the back of a patrol car for jaywalking?

Quote:


As for the Confederate flag and the police chief... That flag means very different things to different people. I would have to ask the man about it to know which of the meanings it has for him? Is it his symbol of southern pride? Is it his symbol of racism and slavery? Or is it his symbol of rebellion against an oppressive government? Those are the big three meanings it has for different groups. Can you be sure it is the chief's declaration of support for racism? And if it is that to him it seems silly to hang it up for everyone to see... like he is proud of it... like maybe it means southern pride? Just maybe? Since he is part of the government I think we can safely rule out the third meaning. Although I am no expert, maybe he is proudly displaying his love of racism? And if so... why not elect some one else in...

It was his love of racism, whether he admits that to himself or anyone else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Snow wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I thought Guardians was excellent. My favorite of the Marvel movies so far. Really looking forward to an Adam Warlock movie.

You'd think he would be better prepared for an attack he knew was coming.

Arrogance and sleep deprivation.


IM3 Tangent:
He couldn't use the "house party" protocol because of the attack on the house. Not only was JARVIS malfunctioning, but his workshop was covered with rubble.

I thought Guardians was excellent. My favorite of the Marvel movies so far. Really looking forward to an Adam Warlock movie.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Cynthia Rothrock


Use your second monk bonus feat, not your third level feat. Masters of Many Styles can ignore prequisites on style feats once they have the base style.


Kryzbyn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

Druid casts anthropomorphic animal spell on a raccoon.

Then casts awaken.

Done.

Cannot cast Awaken on an Anthropomorphic Animal. Intelligence is too high.
Then reverse the order?

Cannot cast Anthropomorphic Animal on an Awakened creature. They are magical beasts.


claudekennilol wrote:
In what cases is it 1.5 str?

If you only have one natural attack or special cases like the dragon's bite attack.


Kryzbyn wrote:

Druid casts anthropomorphic animal spell on a raccoon.

Then casts awaken.

Done.

Cannot cast Awaken on an Anthropomorphic Animal. Intelligence is too high.


Cannot dual wield with Dervish Dance.

(also, necro...)


I would think they are a great choice for an alchemist/barbarian. Help make up for the loss of HP when your rage ends.


My favorite TWF is the Str-based Half-Orc Ranger with an Orc Double Axe (although I only went 6 levels then multiclassed to Barbarian). I will add that I almost never pick up Greater Two-Weapon on any TWF build.


Melkiador wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Armor interferes with the connection between a eidolon and it's summoner so I would say the eidolon is dismissed.

I had considered that, but it begs other questions, like what if you have Unfetter cast on your eidolon? And does this allow your Eidolon to quickly and easily dismiss itself?

Also, is this now a major weakness of Eidolons. Can you wrap a haramaki around an eidolon to dismiss it.

I would say Unfetter doesn't affect their ability to wear armor (because the spell makes no mention of armor). It's only a standard action to dismiss the eidolon. There are not too many ways to get armor on a creature faster than that and I'm not sure what the benefit would be in dismissing it quicker. (I guess if you wanted to dismiss it and use your Summon Monster ability in the same round...)


Melkiador wrote:

More interestingly, the prohibition against armor doesn't say what happens if you put armor on one anyway. There is no penalty assessed to ignoring it. It's not like a Druid wearing metal where it clearly states the penalty for ignoring the restriction.

What happens if an eidolon drinks a potion of instant armor?

Armor interferes with the connection between a eidolon and it's summoner so I would say the eidolon is dismissed.


Simon Legrande wrote:


Seriously? How many times do I have to say "I DON'T AGREE WITH THE RULE" for people to get it? I think it's a poorly written rule, period. I play it the way I think it should be played.

Your rule is bad, and you should feel bad!


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Imagine the poor monk. At 5th level, with 5 ranks in acrobatics, +3 class skill, +4 from increased speed, +5 from High Jump, and let's say a +3 from Dex. He cannot jump less than twenty feet?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
BlackOuroboros wrote:
Bonus points if he asked the smelly dude what his "The Man, The Legend" t-shirt is referring to.

What is that reference to?

Edit: Why on earth are people favoriting this? I'm actually asking!

Imagine one arrow pointing up and another one pointing down.


Lord Gadigan wrote:

Alchemist:

* A mad-bomber-type bomb-focused alchemist that loses the mutagens and some of its other stuff for additional bomb-related features
* Artificer variant of Alchemist that builds gadgets and such

Summoner:
* Summoner archetype that constructs Golems/constructs

These are what I was going to suggest with the addition of the Golem/Construct Summoner being Int based.


Impact is good, especially if combined with Vital Strike and you have access to Enlarge Person.


I would say:
1) yes, it's effectively the item making the natural attack
2) no, merged with the eidolon then you should be held to the eidolon's limit


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


If I were to pick a character who exemplified this sort of ability.. it would be Inspector Clouseau.

Fletch


Alchemists are awesome!


Fighter/Alchemist. Explosive Missle with a Conductive bow.


The rare quad-necro...


Bandw2 wrote:


if someone with 4 int is a borderline idiot, then someone with 4 dex must barely be able to control their movements, must be hard to walk... oh wait, they just get -3 to their reflex save, AC and to ranged attacks... it's a wonder someone with such a disability is able to grasp a sword at all...

Actually, as has been mentioned several times, in Pathfinder an Int of 4 makes you The Villiage Idiot.


CommandoDude wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
CommandoDude wrote:

Stats should never affect roleplaying period - unless the roleplayer wants them to.

There are ALREADY mechanical penalties in place for low stats, people don't need to invent more.

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.

If you have a low INT, you get less skill points, and all skills that key off INT have penalties. If you have low Wis, your Will save and Wis based skills have penalties. If you have low Cha, your Cha based skills have penalties - and you take a penalty on Will saves on certain Spell and SU abilities.

So yes, mental ability scores have modeled penalties - which by the way, are more significant than a carry capacity penalty, given the existence of super cheap items like bags of holding. Does that strength or constitution score accurately reflect how far you can actually get traveling all day? No, not one bit. A character with a strength score of 4 can get the same distance walking in 8 hours that a character with an 18 can get if they have the same base speed.

So if you're saying a character must make a DC 10 int check or whatever to "make a judgement call" if he's dumping int, expect to have to make a DC 10 strength check just to walk if you're dumping strength in my game.

I didn't say that and I don't play in your games.


CommandoDude wrote:

Stats should never affect roleplaying period - unless the roleplayer wants them to.

There are ALREADY mechanical penalties in place for low stats, people don't need to invent more.

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.


Dagan4d2 wrote:
Umbral Reaver wrote:
Dagan4d2 wrote:

Is there any particular reason you cant use more than one shield?

If not having 2 tower shields starts to sound worth the feats. (With 4 arms)

You can wield as many shields as you have hands.

However, shield bonuses don't stack.

So two tower shields would only be useful in that you could use one as cover and still have the shield bonus. Oh well, my dreams of +18 shield bonus will cry in a corner.

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.


graystone wrote:
TrollingJoker wrote:
It's more the part about following them and help them break out. They expected him to bolt right after them like "WHAT ARE YOU GUYS DOING TO MY FRIENDS!?" or something among those lines.

And this is what's totally wrong. Again, it's right there in the village idiot monster entry. Replace his character with 'any simple commoner' or 'stableboy'. Would they have the issue if they didn't know those kind of characters have a 4 int? It's quite clear 4 int doesn't mean what they think it does.

Why would he rush right in? Toddlers can be surprisingly clever and I'm not expecting calculus out of them. What he did was a fairly simple plan. (follow, open cells, hide key). "Hey commoner. Can you follow someone, open some doors and then hide the key?" Do you really expect "Derp....." and he starts drooling on himself?

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.


Doff=take off
Don=put on


Yes (assuming the character is medium sized) with a penalty for using an improperly sized weapon (-2 per size difference, I think).


PirateDevon wrote:

Eric Masterson, later to become Thunderstrike, was "Thor" thunder/hammer wielding badass and that remains (unless I missed something) a matter of record and continuity. But he was never the Norse god of thunder or the son of Odin.

Yes but he was a white male so that's okay.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
sunshadow21 wrote:
Reaching not built in audiences is always tough, but it doesn't get easier by changing what appeals to the audience you already have.

You read Thor because he's a guy?


Legion Janus wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Meritocracy! DEW EET NAO!
There is a webcomic called SSDD that examines the idea of a meritocracy and why such a government style is ultimately as much a failure as democracy tends to be.

Simpsons Did It!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
zauriel56 wrote:
I disagree with the stance of the business but not the ruling. Why should rights be infringed upon because they own a business?

Why should a employee's rights be infringed upon because they have a job?


thejeff wrote:
zauriel56 wrote:
I am coming late to the party I know, and don't have time to go through 10 pages of posts and am in the minority BUT I believe the Supreme Court did the right thing. People have talked about friends who would've died without birth control, that isn't what this is about. It's mainly emergency birth control that this would affect I believe and I don't have time to look up all the details but this means preventative measures would/could be covered but not after contraception has occurred would not. And I personally am ok with this. Birth control pills to regulate periods isn't' the same as destroying a fertilized egg to me. I believe life begins at conception ( yes I am one of those types). But also people know hobby lobby is a Christian run business. They have other options if they want a job from a place that will cover that sort of thing. Why should people be forced to compromise their beliefs? If you don't like it don't support that business and give your support to another company so they have a reason to hire those people who want to have those contraceptive options.

Well, I would take my business elsewhere, but I've never actually shopped at Hobby Lobby in the first place, so it's hard. :)

But just to clarify, you agree with the law the way it stands now after the decision? That the federal government should be able to mandate contraception coverage, but only for companies that don't object on religious grounds?

Does it change your opinion at all to learn that the Court extended the decision in another case (by letting a lower court's ruling stand, I believe) to cover all forms of birth control, not merely those where the company believes them to be abortifacients?

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?


If we are hand-waving reality, why reload times? Why not hand-wave early firearm development and just go straight to a gun that can be reloaded fast?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

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.

1 to 50 of 2,012 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.