Gully13's page

... or does anyone have a copy of the audio file? I'd love to hear it.

Anybody have an updated link?

Hi!

My Battles Subscription was accidentally cancelled with other subscriptions. Here is the original email, customer services email, and my return email. I wanted to post here too because I'm worried I'll miss out on the Rune Giant miniature discount as part of my set purchase.

Thanks for your help!

Original Email
------------------
Hi,

I need to cancel the following subscriptions at this time (including the removal of items in my September shipment):
Pathfinder Campaign Setting
Pathfinder Player Companion
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

The only subscription I'd like to continue is Pathfinder Adventure Path.

Thanks for your time!

I'm sure I'll return to those subscriptions in time.

All the best,

Richard

Paizo Email
------------------
On Aug 29, 2012, at 12:09 PM, customer.service@paizo.com wrote:

Thank you for the notification, your Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Player Companion, and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game subscriptions have been canceled.
Please review your account at paizo.com to verify the correct changes have been made. You may review your account at https://secure.paizo.com/paizo/account/subscriptions.
If you have any further questions or concerns, please let us know. Thanks!

Best regards,
Paizo Customer Service
customer.service@paizo.com

My response Email
------------------

I apologize that the second part of my email was unclear ... but I didn't intend to have my Pathfinder Battles Subscription ended. When I wrote "The only subscription I'd like to continue is Pathfinder Adventure Path." I wasn't considering the Pathfinders Battles as a subscription (which of course it is).

I would like the whole Rise on the Runelord Miniatures Set, including the Rune Giant.

Let me know if it will be a problem adding it back ...

Thanks, so sorry for the miscommunication.

Richard

The Dwarven Maulaxe (stats below) didn't make it into the new Equipment Guide. It originally appeared in the original Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting hardback. It was not brought into The Inner Sea World Guide, but does appear in the Adventurer's Armory (and it's errata). Since the additional resource section says everything in the book is legal (see below) with the Maulaxe not being an exception, I assume it is still OK for my Dwarf Urban Ranger?

Thoughts?

Dwarven Maulaxe

25gp, 1d4, 1d6, x3, 10ft range, 5lbs., B or S

Gully13 wrote:

No Dwarven Maulaxe? Do I have to remove this from my PFS character?

What book did you originally get it from?

The Maulaxe (Dwarven) was in the original campaign setting ... I never realized it didn't make it into the update. It is still listed on Hero Lab and the SRD as PFS compatible, but I'm guessing I have to find a new weapon?

Edit: Its also in the Adventurer's Armory (and the Errata) so I assume it is still PFS legal ... not sure why its not in the Equipment Guide.

No Dwarven Maulaxe? Do I have to remove this from my PFS character?

I'm looking through the PDF of Ultimate Equipment and there doesn't seem to be a mention of the Dwarven Maulaxe ... Is this a mistake or has this weapon been removed?

Mike, from the discussion you posted, do weapon cords prevent reloading? Its not clear.

edit: As in "a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions" ... reloading a weapon is a finer action?

I apologize for the continued tangent, but can someone walk me through (or just link) the thought process for reloading dual barrel pistol in each hand with weapon cords so you can attack 10 times (or even 3) ... I'm not getting it and I like to know what the corner cases are if they come up.

Thanks!

As an aside the Tables on these spreads are perfect ... they work just the way you would want the heads to work.

Redesigning the headers was a good idea but the implementation is off. The boxes the information is in attracts the eye more than the information itself.

I know it is too late to have anything changed, but the actual text (content) should stand out more than the container holding the content. Look at some books by Edward Tufte for some examples. It does do a nice job of separating the header content from the body and having it break up the sections on a glance, but there is no reason it can't do both.

Look at the two examples of "Marshling Signals" on this page:

Link

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/04/because-information-is-beautiful.h tml

edit: This is also true of the awkward way "Head" is highlighted ... would have worked better to just make it bold and change color ...

Just a quick resurrection for this thread to see if anyone has heard anything that might clarify the above issue?

"Squawk! ... I took an arrow in the knee, otherwise I'd be in there before you Harsk"

There are plenty of role playing reasons to avoid a club and use a staff ... if you don't see them fine, but others do.

Looks like the rules FAQ thread died an unheralded death.

As a side note ... does any one know if there is still an ongoing thread for FAQ questions?

I didn't see any when I searched. It might have been discontinued when Paizo added the FAQ message board button.

Thanks for the feedback ...

I didn't know for sure if domain/bloodline powers where intended to be used on others, but I suspected it ... and then I saw Pit Touched and I reconsider my previous beliefs ...

... and then thought to run it be the knowledgable people (err, monsters) here.

If everyone wouldn't mind FAQing this, I'd love to hear from Paizo to see if indeed these powers are mainly seen as something to help others, and to hear what they might consider a fix to Pit Touched.

1) A number of class powers (like those from various domains and bloodlines) give characters an ability for one round.

2) Page 178 of the Core Rulebook says "effects that last a certain number of rounds end just before the same initiative count that they began on"

3) Because many of these powers require a standard action to activate, their durations often ends before the character with the power can make personal use of them.

Resulting in:
– powers that can only be used on others at lower levels (example A)

or

-powers that have no direct function because it can't be given to others and doesn't last long enough to be used by the character (example B, unless its a swift spell I suppose)

Does anyone know if this is what the developers intended? Has it been addressed in an FAQ or in other posts somewhere? It seems like the obvious purpose would be to have the character use the power for one round (similar to True Shot), but the wording prevents it.

War Domain

Granted Powers: You are a crusader for your god, always ready and willing to fight to defend your faith.

Battle Rage (Sp): You can touch a creature as a standard action to give it a bonus on melee damage rolls equal to 1/2 your cleric level for 1 round (minimum +1). You can do so a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Pit-Touched

Your diabolic corruption is from a source in the deepest parts of Hell.
Associated Bloodline: Infernal.

Bloodline Arcana

Whenever you cast a spell, you gain a bonus on Intimidate checks equal to the spell’s level for 1 round.

Obviously normal sight relies on size and contrast ... everyone can see literally for light-years when looking at the stars at night.

So it depends how your DM wants simulate it, or just go by the RAW mentioned above.

Everyday after getting his/her (8hrs) of rest, a wizard (not sorcerer) has to choose which spells from his spell book they are going to put into the available slots they have. The number of slots and at which level depend on the level of wizard. Once a spell is used it is gone until the wizard gets more rest. A wizard fills his/her spell book with spells by; going up in levels, or copying them from other spell books, or from scrolls found.

This is a quick go at it because I have to run in a sec, but I'm sure others can elaborate.

edit:spelling

Just to provide another data point (as I mentioned in the other thread), I bought a case and ...

• had no broken minis
• had 4-5 fall out of their plastic molds
• had at least one of each
• 3-4 (of the ones that fell from their molds) had a bent weapon, arm, etc.

Overall, very happy.

An AoO can be replaced with a Combat Maneuver so I would say yes.

edit: e.g. Disarm, Sunder ... Keep in mind these cause AoO themselves

Knowledge (culture) or Knowledge (sociology) is a much better description. Basically an understanding of humanoid cultures and how they interact ... Each time you go somewhere new , you plug in the new sights and sounds into your already existing understanding of how culture works.

About 4-5 came loose in their boxes, none broken, 3-4 bent, my boxes where not taped... final count has at least one of each model. 83 Total.

33 Common, 22 Uncommon, 28 Rare - no duplicates in a single brick.

James, I'm not sure if your still haunting this thread :) , but I was wondering ...

The similarities between the Caulborn and the Sinspawn ... this can't be a coincidence, right? I don't suppose you might want to elaborate?!

Love all the Kaer Maga stuff, as I slowly work through the lore!

Greetings Paizo,

Unfortunately I need to cancel all my subscriptions except for the Pathfinder Adventure Path. I'm sure I'll be back for more soon ... you have some great products.

Thanks for your help,

Gully

(Richard Pratt)

Hello,

Can you end my Pathfinders Modules subscription?

All the others keep going forward.

Thanks!

Great work BTW ... (just need to tighten the budget)

Gully

(Richard Pratt)

As always ... thanks everyone for the info!

In regards to #2 ... side question ...

If you use a heavy shield with a light weapon (in your off hand?) would your penalty be -2 or -4?

You could easily say the combat is just there to help define the limits of what you can role play ... and I think that is what the majority of the rules are about.

[

Ideally that's how it works...but normally, in a 4-6 hour session of D and D at the higher levels you're lucky to muck your way through a fight in less then an hour. If it's a dungeon? I don't even want to think about it.
The motivations, and the stuff people tend to care about is from the story part of the game, but I doubt that most parties spend more time RP'ing the fighting. In terms of setting up the map even, drawing out the encounter, keeping initiative and general book keeping the fights can really drag on. The game is heavily geared towards combat by it's rules, the traditions behind it, and it's origin as a wargame (Chainmail, spiritual successor).
Go take a look at some other game systems. White Wolf games come to mind, as does L5R or 7th sea. Those are games that more heavily encourage roleplay.
Don't get me wrong, you spend ALL of your time roleplaying, even when you're in combat. It's just that combat is the focus of almost all the game rules.

I apologize for the tangent ... But Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, etc. are not about combat. I've played D&D and AD&D and its always been about Tenser, St. Cuthbert and exploring in my games .. sure the fighting is there but in support of exploring IMO.

First, Roleplay seldom comes first. The game is geared HEAVILY towards combat. 75% of all printed material is based around combat in some way shape or form, and almost all of the modules are printed around combat encounters, in which case the bard is kind of hard to validate.

I'd have to disagree with this ...

How much of any module you buy is about combat? The majority (80%?) is about the story.

In one of the campaign's I play in, we get together for 4-6 hours every week and we get into 0-2 combats during these hours (yes, one time we didn't have a single fight).

Most of our time is spent role-playing ... we have an amazing time and our bard loves it.

Edit: You could also say 75% of all printed material is based around roleplay in SOME FORM.

Except, even with Improved Feint the Feint action is a move action. If you use a move action, you can't take a full attack action.

And that means you normally can't get two attacks in the same round you feint.

Ah thanks, that makes sense .. thanks for the clarification.

I thought one of the main benefits was that if you had multiple attacks you could sneak attack more than once that round as opposed to just the next attack ...

Of course this would require 3 or more attacks but TWF and a high level rogue would be good.

(maybe I'm missing something?)

edit: I forgot Feint is not a Attack Action ... so you'd only need two attacks to take advantage of it ...

1. Exotic does not mean better. Yes you have to pay a feat to use it in most circumstances, but that is just not exactly how these are designed. Some do offer some nice benefits, but that is by no means the rules. Exotic means rare and unusual first. That means that some of them are not the "best" in-game mechanical decision your character can make.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Just to cast my vote, I have no problem with exotic = rare.

Why not have a character use a feat to use a weapon other characters can't? It means NPC will react to you differently, there will be different role playing as a result. Having rare weapons not cost a feat makes them not rare in my mind.

We may need clarification on that as Dirge of Doom specifically says "This performance cannot cause a creature to become frightened or panicked, even if the targets are already shaken from another effect." The question is does Dirge of Dooms shaken condition stack with other shaken effects applied after it, or does it overlap?

Clearly if you used Dazzling Display first and Dirge of Doom second the target wouldn't become frightened. It is odd that the reverse would work...

I knew I had read that somewhere ... glad to know it was under Dirge ... and I agree it seems strange to work one way and not the other ... more clarification would be good.

I think the convergence of factors does favor bards overall, but not dramatically so. Either a rogue or a sorcerer can be almost as good.

As you describe it I'd agree, the Bard I play has a very CHA so in that case he does extremely well in social situations, but he might be different than most ...

Favored class currently grants players +1 skill OR hp / level.

This seems a little weak.

In comparison to what? ... its pretty nice compared to nothing :)

A bard really isn't that better at social situations than a sorcerer or a rogue.

I think the perception that they are stems frm the fact that bards tend to be played differently. After all, a sorcerer or a rogue has teeth as well; a bard, less so.

Bard: 6+INT modifier, high CHA class, many class skills

I don't know how you can say that Bard's aren't uniquely good in social situations ...

Dirge of Doom + Dazzling Display is a great combo ...

edit: just to clarify ... from page 563 ... Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.

To be honest I go back and forth ... so I see what your saying ... it would nice to see it clarified but I'll go with the majority here ... meaning no spell required of any source if you take the +5DC.

(its definitely what my character prefers)

Gully

The DC to create a magic item increases by +5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet.

Yes, I read this but it still seems to say that if the caster doesn't know the spell then its a +5DC to get someone else to cast it ... (combined with the quote saying all requirements must be met).

Maybe I'm the only one who reads it that way?

You don't need the spell at all. The +5 DC replaces that. Like Ogre said, in 3.5 you can get someone to cast the spell for you. I'm guessing you could still get someone to help you in that regard to avoid the higher DC. I haven't read the Core thoroughly on this but I guess that's still holds true. I wouldn't see why not.

It seems like, IMO, that this seems more geared toward wondrous items, magic armor, and magic weapons. Not so much staffs, wands, and potions. Of course there all always exceptions to both.

But on page 549 it says:

"Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created."

My reading of this means that the +5DC is for if you have someone else meet the requirement. Can someone provide a definitive verdict?

It doesn't say it effects CMD so I'd guess no second DEX bonus ...

If you don't have the spell does that mean you take +5 DC and still need someone else to cast it or are you off the hook for the spell if you take the 5?

also ...

I'm guessing there is no requirement to cast that given spell everyday of work, sense I don't see it anywhere in the book.

Hi ...
Lots of good questions ... I don't know the answer to most of them but while your waiting for someone who does you can look in this thread:

LINK

I know a bunch of these have been answered there ...

Does anyone know when the hardcover core rulebook hits the bookstores

I was not able to enjoy the festivities at gen-con (no money to go)
I would really like to know the offical release of the hardcover book to the general public

Hmmm... your local gaming store should have had it on the 13th ... big chain bookstores I believe are holding it till the 19th ...

page 144:

"A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way"

There is a contraddiction with the rules on page 141:

"The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon — only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round"

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand' is obviously for larger creatures who can wield (albeit with a -2 penalty) a smaller Double weapon as a One-handed weapon - and in this case, since they are not using the second head of the weapon, they cannot benefit from wielding it for Two-Weapon fighting. However, the first part ('a character can choose to wield it two-handed') falls in contraddiction with the rule on page 144 - unless that rule has a typo and should read 'A double weapon can be wielded as a two-handed weapon' (etc.)

I don't see the contradiction and I didn't get the same meaning you did.

The reference to 'creatures wielding a double weapon in one hand,' I thought, referred to somebody wielding a quarter staff with one hand and using the other for something else (say a shield). That person could use it one handed but not as a two handed weapon.

The second quote refers to using the quaterstaff as a baseball bat.

Just my 2 coppers.

edit: Oops... missed post above saying something similar.