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

1,554 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,554 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Remy Balster wrote:

Please tell me specifically which of these steps is wrong, and why? This is how I parse the rules, and it seems straightforward. Please be specific, I want to understand why it is being said this doesn't work.

Two of your buddies threaten an Ogre. You have Gang Up. You have Sneak Attack and are within 30ft, and about to shoot the Ogre.

Quote:
The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent.

Are you flanking? Yes. Why? Because two of your allies threaten the Ogre. That is the listed requirement to count as flanking, and the requirement is met. (And while flanking, any melee attack you make gets a handy +2 bonus to hit the target)

Quote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.

Can your ranged attack count as a sneak attack? Well, so long as you flank your target it gets the listed extra damage. Are you flanking? Yes.

Quote:
Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.

Are you in range? Yes.

Then your attack gets sneak attack damage.

Except, according to the FAQ, flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.


James Risner wrote:


Bling wrote:
So a base class into a prestige class is still out? Even if you would still qualify for the prestige class?
Yes, blame the Hell Knight jerks.

The "no base class into a prestige class" came from people trying to use one prestige class to qualify for a different one and using that to retrain out of all their base classes for prestige classes.


Or my favorite:

I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.
Genghis Khan


Kryzbyn wrote:

Ezekiel 25:17

I think that would be some cold-blooded sh*t to say to somebody before you busted some steel in his a$$.

If you're going Ezekiel, I like, "You must suffer for the horrible obscene things you have done!"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Heh, they should call this guy Kobold Clever, amirite?


Cevah wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Cevah wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

@fretgod99

So, if there was an archer with snap shot, but no other way to threaten (including using the bow as an improvised weapon, that's a discussion for another thread), and a fighter on either ends of a target, would the fighter get the +2 bonus for flanking?

The answer would be yes. Why then can't said archer be considered "flanking"?

Because flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.

You mean this?

CRB p197 wrote:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

Fighter is making a melee attack? Check!

Opponent threatened on its opposite border or opposite corner? Check!

The requirements are satisfied. Fighter wins a +2 bonus. Opponent is flanked.

/cevah

I was referring to the second question. About the archer. The one Frodo didn't answer himself.

So you think someone can be "flanked" on only one side, even though someone else is on the other side. That is, "flanking" is not defined by position.

/cevah

I believe ranged attacks do not benefit from flanking. This includes not gaining sneak attack damage. I believe it is at least implied in the CRB and I believe the FAQ confirms it.


FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

You've quoted that a couple times Durngrun, but the archer IS flanking, all that FAQ says is that the flanking bonus is not applied to ranged attacks.

If the archer wasn't flanking, then the fighter would get no flanking bonus.

The archer isn't flanking. The archer is threatening which allows the fighter to flank. Why? Thems the rules.


Cevah wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

@fretgod99

So, if there was an archer with snap shot, but no other way to threaten (including using the bow as an improvised weapon, that's a discussion for another thread), and a fighter on either ends of a target, would the fighter get the +2 bonus for flanking?

The answer would be yes. Why then can't said archer be considered "flanking"?

Because flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.

You mean this?

CRB p197 wrote:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

Fighter is making a melee attack? Check!

Opponent threatened on its opposite border or opposite corner? Check!

The requirements are satisfied. Fighter wins a +2 bonus. Opponent is flanked.

/cevah

I was referring to the second question. About the archer. The one Frodo didn't answer himself.


Shameless Plug! Don't know how much it will help since they are slightly different goals but at the very least there are some nice pieces of equipment.


FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

@fretgod99

So, if there was an archer with snap shot, but no other way to threaten (including using the bow as an improvised weapon, that's a discussion for another thread), and a fighter on either ends of a target, would the fighter get the +2 bonus for flanking?

The answer would be yes. Why then can't said archer be considered "flanking"?

Because flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.


Who said it was too simple? I thought this was a question of how much make believe time it takes to search a pretend room.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, Search = Overtly precise detailed list that requires an immense amount of time?

Simplifying search is a sin now?

What is the "proper" way, and what does it contribute to the overall fun of all?

I'm not saying a player should have to list every nook and crany but I do feel a search should take longer than a glance.


Komoda wrote:

Or you could hand-wave all that stuff and make it one roll instead of:

I search the floor.
I search the floor behind the door.
I search the floor behind the bed.
I search the floor behind the chair.
I search the floor behind the desk.
I search the floor behind the couch.
I search the floor behind the other chair.
I search the floor behind the table on the wall.
I search the floor behind the dresser.

Then I search the wall.
I search the wall behind the door.
I search the wall behind the bed.
I search the wall behind the chair.
I search the wall behind the desk.
I search the wall behind the couch.
I search the wall behind the other chair.
I search the wall behind the table on the wall.
I search the wall behind the dresser.

Unless you like that sort of thing * each player * each room.

4 players x 10 rooms = only 720 checks.

You could certainly hand wave the rolls (which you're doing anyways with take 20) but shouldn't time be a factor? Admittedly I haven't studied the perception rules (at least not recently) but a thorough search of the room should take longer than a thorough glance around the room.


Let's use an example from earlier...

”Flanking into ‘Jumping’ rules” wrote:

Jumping

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 jumping bonus if you are jumping.
”Modified Gang Up” wrote:
Benefit: You are considered to be Jumping if at least two of your allies are threatening that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.
”Modified Sneak Attack” wrote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue is jumping.

Let's say this confuses some people. Enough that they frequently ask, "does jumping apply to ranged attacks when only Melee attacks are mentioned?" Then the devs answer, "jumping specifically applies to Melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from feats that modify jumping."

Would you still think ranged attacks qualify as "Jumping?"


Remy Balster wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:
James Risner wrote:
If you throw a dagger from a flanked position, you do not count as flanking and do not gain sneak attack.
Why?
Flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.

So?

Flanking refers to a number of things. How is this relevant?

You can't honestly be this obtuse. Ranged attacks are not considered flanking. It's in the CRB and clarified with a FAQ. What more are you looking for?


Imagine you had a magic ring. The magical properties of this ring lets you treat any weapon you wield as a +1 weapon, granting a +1 enhancement to attack and damage.
Would this ring allow you to enhance non-magical weapons with a special ability? It's the same with your shield. You can enchant a shield as a magic shield, a magic weapon, or both. The Bashing shield special ability allows you to treat your shield as a +1 weapon. This does not mean you have made your magic shield a magic weapon. You still have to enchant your shield as a weapon before you can add weapon special abilities to your magic shield.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Remy Balster wrote:
James Risner wrote:
If you throw a dagger from a flanked position, you do not count as flanking and do not gain sneak attack.
Why?

Flanking specifically refers to melee attacks.


The Bashing special ability allows it to act as a +1 weapon but it still has to be a +1 weapon before you can add special abilities.


stemoo64 wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Check the FAQ.
Sorry, the condescending comment was for the post before. Hit the wrong reply.

I apologize as I did not mean to be condescending. I only mentioned it because I've seen the same question in two other threads just recently.


How about heavy shield, reach weapon, and longbow? Hold the reach weapon in one hand to attack with the bow at a distance, reach weapon for when they close, then shield bash. The Fighter's Fork from ultimate equipment would be a good choice. Changes from a one handed trident to reach weapon or light weapon and back again. Be ready for everything!


Kazaan wrote:
Zwordsman wrote:

hum right they are technically archetypes I guess.

Probably not then.
Technically, Wildblooded is an archetype. But also, technically, Bloodrager is an alternate class for both Sorcerer and Barbarian. Ninja is an alternate class for Rogue, which is why Ninja can take Rogue archetypes, albeit, limited to archetypes that trade the only set of abilities Rogues and Ninja have in common (Uncanny Dodge and IUD). So Ninja can take the Scout, Sanctified Rogue, and other Rogue archetypes that trade out no other Rogue class abilities other than UD and IUD. Therefore, if there is an archetype for either constituent class in one of the "combo classes" from ACG that only relies on changing class abilities that both the standard and alternate class have in common, you'd be able to use it. So, if Bloodrager has the Arcana and the respective class powers just as Sorcerer does (I'm not sure off-hand, I've only skimmed the ACG), then you'd be able to use the archetype. Same goes for Barbarian archetypes that only trade abilities that the Bloodrager also has.

Except the question is about Eldritch Heritage, is it not?


SonicArrow wrote:
I'm sure my DM will allow it....

There. Enough said. Now does anybody have any ADVICE for this ADVICE thread?


chaoseffect wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Seems like they could have been thought out a little better at times.
This can be said about a great many things in the game.
I can't argue with that.

Sure you can. This is the Internet.


Since the OP has permission from the DM, what difference does it make?

Another option would be to go Dex based (like most TWF builds) and use Elven curve blades. Two levels of ranger can get you Power Attack without the Str score. Two power attacking agile curve blades could put out some damage.


RAW, it's a no go (discussed several times in several threads) but if you have DM permission then who cares. I say go with large bastard swords and multiclass the hell out of it. Alchemist gets you the extra arms, Titan Mauler Barbarian will get rid of oversized weapon penalties, and Two Weapon Fighter to lower your penalties for not using light weapons. Once you've gotten rid of the (many) penalties then go back to alchemist for more extracts.


Quote:


Gang Up: Does this feat (page 161) allow you to flank a foe with ranged weapons?

The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent. The feat makes no mention of ranged attacks being included, and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from this feat. (JMB, 8/13/10)

I noticed that...


Never said I don't like role playing or item descriptions, but when my character takes effort to find out what his magical item is and the DM responds "no, sorry it's just too magical for you to know," then that is aggravating.

Have you ever thought if the possibility your players don't express their disappointment with you because you treat anyone who complains as a petulant child? Might stifle discourse a little...


Jaelithe wrote:

I've never had an eye roll, a "This is BS!" gritted teeth or any reaction other than a determination to employ whatever resources the PC could bring to bear on identifying that which had come into their possession. To me, and to them, that's a great deal of the game's fun.

To you it's fun. For you players you think it's fun because they don't roll their eyes even though they become determined to use whatever resource they could bring to bear just to end your little mystery.

Like I said, saying to your group "you find a +1 sword" might be boring or immersion breaking. But when casting Identify doesn't identify the magical properties it gets old, fast.
Of course if you have never used a magic item from the CRB, as you claim, then you've never had a + anything weapon in your game (because those are listed in the CRB).


Rerednaw wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Rerednaw wrote:

@CK18

Ah, sorry.

I think you are limited to 1/swift. 2 weapons could be on cords. that would 1/swift and 2 move actions to recover 3 weapons in 1 round?

Weapon cords are move actions now.
Um yes...what's your question? Called weapon as swift...and two move actions. The main problem I see is two different hands mean fighting with an off-hand.

My bad. Misunderstood what you were saying.


mysticbelmont wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Allowing them to build stronger base items would essentially give them unlimited resources or allow other classes to buy their enhanced items.
And?

And in the first instance you are removing one of the balancing factors of the game. In the second you are regulating the alchemist to a NPC class as you could be any other class and then just buy the alchemist class abilities at the store.


Chris Lambertz wrote:
Removed some posts. Bigoted/racist comments and personal attacks are not OK here. Take a moment to revisit the messageboard rules. We're keeping an eye on this thread, as it seems there's a lot here set to induce grar, so if these comments can't be kept out of the discussion, the thread will be locked.

Ha! I got to read it before you deleted it this time. Too slow today, Chris.


Mojorat wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
Or just read th ring which explains it only helps part PFS th skill.
You have got to get a bigger keypad on your phone! (Emoticon that denotes I'm joking)
Sigh I noticed lately its tried auto correct for specific game terms. So ill be talking sbout grapple and mid sentence it will say sandpoont.

I honestly don't know if you are joking or not but if you are, you are hilarious. I tip my hat to you, sir.


Thanks Calybos1 and Daenar. I think it will work pretty well. I'm looking at +15 attack dealing 4d6+14 damage. Now I'm wondering if I have enough bombs but with Extra Bombs only giving you two extra bombs I'm not sure it's worth a feat. I guess without Fast Bombs I can go for 13 rounds a day and keep my move action for positioning. With my falchion and Alchemical Weapon ability I have a decent backup.

I wonder if Immolation Bomb would be helpful. Fire off one or two immolation bombs and then draw my sword...
I assume Targeted Admixture would work with Immolation, would I get my other bonuses to damage? 1d6+19 for four rounds while I go to town with my falchion might be nice.

Also, can't believe I didn't mention it earlier, I have my mutagen that could boost my Dex if needed. That would give me another +2 to attack and +3 to AC (with the natural armor bonus)


Mojorat wrote:
Or just read th ring which explains it only helps part PFS th skill.

You have got to get a bigger keypad on your phone! (Emoticon that denotes I'm joking)


Jaelithe wrote:
Threeshades wrote:
That was Durngrun, not me.

Uh ... really?

You didn't say:

Quote:
GM: Elrond inspects the sword carefully before he speaks: "This is Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver. A famous blade forged by the High Elves of the West. My kin. May it serve you well." It's a +3 Longsword of Goblinoid Bane.
That's to what I was referring.

I believe threeshades was replying to thejeff.


More like an extensive retraining of the character. Same stats, same class (although different archetypes), but it's the same character.


Wasn't thinking of a ranged build per se, just a bomb throwing build (although I like that belt of hurling idea). I like Grenadier for the Directed Blast ability. With Strafe Bombs and regular Bombs that gives me cones, lines, and bursts. I could take Breath Weapon Bomb (I think that's the name) but it doesn't combine with Explosive Bomb like Directed Blast and Strafe Bomb.

I have Force Bombs for anything fire doesn't hurt. Was thinking about Frost Bombs for staggered.

Not sure I could get approval to change his stats (I know it seems arbitrary when I'm changing everything else but my DM can be kind if a stickler).

I do like Beastmorph but I'm really trying to focus on bombs.

Sorry, not trying to slap down all your suggestions. I try not to overshadow the other players who don't spend as much time on this as I do. I guess I could just spend less time on it but where's the fun in that!


Why not multiclass? Inquistor/Paladin could be a deadly combination.


Stats are Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 20, Wis 10, Cha 8. Locked in gear is Adamantine Folding Plate, +3 Keen Falchion, and Cloak of Resistance (+5). Character was a scholarly type in an isolated city, joined the army when war broke out, was "retired" and then called in for one last mission. I do plan on switch hitting some (I only have 13 bombs!). Half-Orc, might should have mentioned that. My group are casual gamers so I don't need an uber build, just looking to have fun. One character is the aforementioned fighter/rogue. The other player missed last session so I don't know what he will have (but most likely a TWF ranger). We also have a NPC gunslinger with us but I'm not too concerned with stepping on her toes!

Trying to keep the two characters similiar. I simply changing his focus from his falchion to his bombs. First version was Fighter (Unbreakable)/ Alchemist (Chirurgeon).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Is your suggestion, perhaps: "I got stabbed? Alright, I drop prone, roll around in 'agony,' and forfeit my turn, because it hurts."

Yeah that sounds about right. I mean, clearly your only two choices are that or ignore it entirely.


Tumble was a skill in 3.5. In Pathfinder, balance, jump, and tumble were combined into acrobatics. The book tells you what skill to use and what the DC is for the check. How you describe it is entirely up to you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
1d4+1 is comparable to a dagger. Does getting stabbed with a dagger "tickle?"

It's actually more like, "comparable to a low-damage melee weapon wielded by a character who devoted almost nothing to melee damage."

And with the way D&D/PF does "health?" Yes, that does, in fact, tickle. ;)

Oh, right. I forgot you are not supposed to role play in Pathfinder.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

It's kind of a re-work of an already existing character that is Str based and I'm trying to change his focus without changing the character as much as possible. He is also locked into an Adamantine Folding Plate so his Dex doesn't affect his AC really.

Weapon Master Fighters do not choose a weapon group. Their weapon training simply applies to their chosen weapon.

Well...as a Str based character, why go Bomber at all? Melee Alchemists are quite frightening, after all.

You can even do that and switch-hit via bombs with literally no investment beyond class levels, if you like.

Yeah he actually was a pretty brutal Melee alchemist! He was originally built with vital strike and devastating strike. I'm changing him (with DM permission of course!) because after our first game I found out our fighter/rogue character also had a vital strike build. I build a lot of characters so changing mine was the easiest route. Since we've already played one session so I want to keep it as close as possible to the original character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can understand describing something as a +1 sword can be immersion breaking but speaking as a player it is incredibly annoying to not know your weapon's properties. When I first started playing my DM was like that. Even after getting someone to cast Identify, he would just give some mystical description so every attack was "I rolled X to hit and X dmg plus whatever my sword does." Gets old quick.


Ilja wrote:
Yeah Risner i think youre far off in this case. I agree with you abouy how it should be run, and also think theres often an anally awkward RAW-hysteria in these parts, but reading it as "any morale bonus" isnt awkward, its the most obvious way. That doesnt make it correct necessarily but its not in any way twisting words or an "awkward" reading. Give someo who doesnt know the game an exerpt of the Rage ability and this weapon enhancement and ask how big bonus someone with a +4 courageous weapon raging gets to strength and youll probably get the answer "six".

Give someone who never played the game a Barbarian and a Courageous weapon and I doubt they ever realize their ability increases are "morale" bonuses.


Just to be clear, the acrobatic check to jump and an acrobatic check to avoid an attack of opportunity are two different checks. The only way the jump check would avoid an AoO is if the player jumped completely over the opponent's threatened area. So jumping over a medium creature would mean jumping from more than five feet in front of it, clearing the top of the creature by five feet, and then landing more than five feet behind it. Otherwise you are making an acrobatic check to jump, to which the ring would apply, and an acrobatic check to tumble, to which the ring would not apply.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Sure, lower Dex can theoretically work...but why?

I mean, bomber Alchemists need Int and nothing else except middling Dex and Con (Say 12-14 each). What stat do you gain by dropping Dex lower than that? Why bother doing so when Dex is one of the best stats in the game? Especially given that you sacrifice Rapid Shot, which is one of the things that makes 8th level or higher Alchemists so dangerous.

As for the build as a whole...bombs are not a listed weapon category and thus inapplicable for Fighter Weapon Training, officially speaking.

It's kind of a re-work of an already existing character that is Str based and I'm trying to change his focus without changing the character as much as possible. He is also locked into an Adamantine Folding Plate so his Dex doesn't affect his AC really.

Weapon Master Fighters do not choose a weapon group. Their weapon training simply applies to their chosen weapon.


1d4+1 is comparable to a dagger. Does getting stabbed with a dagger "tickle?"


Thread Title wrote:
A Simple Question

You must be new here.


So I was making a Mad-Bomber style Alchemist when I noticed something. Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot don't have a Dex requirement. So I was thinking, since bombs are touch attacks, how viable would a low Dex character (I'm talking a Dex of 10, so really a middling Dex, not a low Dex) be?

I was thinking of four levels of Fighter (Weapon Master) for extra feats and Weapon Training (Bombs). That combined with weapon focus, weapon specialization, and Gloves of Dueling would give you +4 att/+5 dmg at the cost of 2d6 bomb dmg and 2 discoveries.

Eight levels of Alchemist (Grenadier), with Explosive Bombs and Strafe Bombs (plus Force Bombs for anything that doesn't burn).

This would give a BAB of +10, a +4 from Fighter (mentioned above), +1 from Throw Anything and another +1 from PBS when applicable. Is a +15/+16 good enough for a touch attack at level twelve?

Would Fast Bombs be worth a feat if I didn't have Rapid Shot or Two-Weapon Fighting? I would still have two attacks from BAB. I was thinking without Fast Bombs I wouldn't have to worry as much about running out of bombs but I do like the idea of firing two 40 ft lines of fire!

Any ideas or suggestions greatly appreciated, even if just to tell me I'm crazy!

1 to 50 of 1,554 << 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.