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

Gwen Smith's page

FullStarFullStar Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle. 1,051 posts (1,176 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,051 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Markov Spiked Chain wrote:

One part says Paladin(Divine Defender) and then later Paladin(Sacred Shield). I would consider taking a third paladin level with Holy Tactician. Ideally with Torag's Defensive Strategist trait.

This will let you spread lookout to everyone in 30' for sweet no-surprise love. And if you pick up a second teamwork feat, you can swap to that after the fight starts as a swift action. Outflank and Escape Route are both good options.

I LOVE the Holy Tactician. I've got a Brawler 1/Holy Tactician + Holy Guide 2. Next level, I'll be able to learn a new teamwork feat as a move action and give it to everyone as a swift action. At level 6, I'll be able to give everyone two teamwork feats at the same time, once per day.

It takes a lot of planning and feat investment, but I'm hoping it pays off well.

I run a similar build, so I can tell you that it works really well in practice. My Unarmed Fighter/Cavalier is 6th level, and I've run her in a playtest at 10th level.

At 6th level with +1 Benevolent Armor and a +1 Benevolent Lance, she aids for +7 AC on an AoO, 3 times a round. In the 10th level playtest, she had that up to +9, 4 times a round (by increasing the enhancement bonuses), and she could transfer an additional +2 from her Guarding shield to an adjacent ally each round.

A couple of notes:

I picked up Crane Style to reduce the fighting defensively penalty and to increase my dodge bonus up to +6, so everyone gets +3. If you're going with a shield wielder, check out the Madu for a similar benefit.

The Bodyguard feat with a reach weapon is awesome. While mounted, you can use a lance in one hand and still use a shield/cast spells/whatever.

I don't see any stats for your mount, but I used the Bodyguard archetype from Animal Archive. So my wolf also has the Bodyguard feat and the "Aid" trick. If I use all of my AoOs in a round, my wolf can start aiding for +2 AC, or we can both aid AC and stack up to +9 AC.

I also used the Call for Help trait to boost everyone's attack when I'm going Total Defense, but that's a deity-specific trait that might not fit your cleric/paladin build.

The aid another increase from Helpful does not stack with the Order of the Dragon Aid Allies ability. They both call out "instead of the normal +2". You need to look for aids that say "increases the bonus by 1", like the Honor Guard ability does. (I went with Order of the Sword to boost my low Will save, but the challenge ability from Order of the Dragon is better than Order of the Sword.)

The primary drawback to this build is that your flat-footed armor class sucks. Lookout will help that a lot, but keep your Perception up or get a high-perception mount. See Invisibility or Invisibility Purge will also help.

I am a huge fan of the Helpful Halfling build in general, and your Bard build will provide more general benefits to the party than my martial version.

Tarantula wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:

The Dead Man's Headband references the steal maneuver:

In addition, if this headband is attached to the outside of a hat, the wearer’s hat or headgear cannot be blown off or removed by wind, water, or environmental effects, and the wearer gains a +5 circumstance bonus to his CMD against steal and sunder attempts targeting his headgear.
Since you can clearly steal headgear, I would say that if the headband is under a helmet (or hat), you would probably have to use 2 steal maneuvers: one to swipe the helmet followed by one to steal the headband.
So are you saying that you wouldn't consider a helmet to be closely worn such as armor and thus in category C?

I would not, no. I have seen bucket helms get knocked off of fighters in real life, and football helmets and motorcycle helmets get knocked off all the time. I have also known magicians who removed people's belts without them even realizing it.

So I have no problem believing that a skilled fighter using a combat maneuver could easily unbuckle or just break a single chin strap and remove a helmet.

I'd put helmets in category B.
(Hats are clearly in category A, because the Dead Man's Headband moves them into Category B.)

The feat Charge Through provides a way to charge through squares containing enemies.

Regarding jumping over obstacles:
We've had a lot of discussions in our area about jumping obstacles on a charge. Since Janni Style says you can jump as part of a charge, it seems like you should be able to jump over obstacles while charging, but the rules say your path must be clear.

We've been using the following compromise: If your Acrobatics bonus is high enough that you can beat the jump DC on a natural 1, then you can jump the obstacle on a charge. If you can't possibly fail the jump, it doesn't seem like it counts as an obstacle.

So most characters could probably jump a 5 ft gap or a bench or something on a charge (that would be the equivalent of hurdle races.) Dex based characters could easily clear a 10-15 foot gap on a charge (like in Parkour).

There is definitely some confusion as to under what circumstances players can take 10, so you hear common mistakes like "You're in danger from the lava, so you can't take 10 to jump across the pit."

As a GM, I tell players "If I ask you for a check, you can take 10. If I need you to actually roll the die, I will specifically ask for a roll."

Now, I usually have to remind players that you can't take 10 when you aid another on skill checks.

The Dead Man's Headband references the steal maneuver:

In addition, if this headband is attached to the outside of a hat, the wearer’s hat or headgear cannot be blown off or removed by wind, water, or environmental effects, and the wearer gains a +5 circumstance bonus to his CMD against steal and sunder attempts targeting his headgear.

Since you can clearly steal headgear, I would say that if the headband is under a helmet (or hat), you would probably have to use 2 steal maneuvers: one to swipe the helmet followed by one to steal the headband.

Cap. Darling wrote:
BadBird wrote:
The Sohei's ability to use Brawling armor and Weapon Training is extremely useful; at level 6 you're give up a slightly larger damage die for at least +3 to attack and damage. Since you can't take things like Power Attack or Focus at level 1, Dual Talent really is good stuff whatever you put it in - and you really want to start out with 18 strength.
I was under the impression that monks counter as having full bab when flurrying and therefore could Pick PA at level 1 but only use it with flurry until level 2. If i an wrong in this? Some feat rearanfement is needed.

When flurrying, your use your monk levels in place of your BAB to calculate your attack rolls and any level-dependent effects, but it doesn't change your BAB for the purposes of qualifying for feats.

For example, at level 4, when flurrying, you Power Attack is at -2 attack/+4 damage; when not flurrying, your Power Attack is at -1/+2. But your actual BAB is still only 3, so you can't pick up any feats that require BAB 4.

(Unfortunately, there's not a PFS-legal monk archetype that changes the bonus feat list to include Power Attack.)

Side note:
On average, you'll do more damage with Power Attack unless the attack penalty drops your to hit percentage down to 20% (i.e., you need a 17 to hit). That's the break point where the additional damage is balanced by the decreased chance to hit.

You can also mitigate that with the feat Furious Focus, which lets you ignore the PA attack penalty for the first attack in each round. For monks, this is especially helpful for those rounds when you have to move and can't flurry: use Furious Focus to counter the 3/4 BAB.

Meiliken wrote:
Last update. The campaign failed for me. Can't say about the other players. Probably not for them since they were all new players so eh. Over the course of 10 levels, the DM/GM changed the house rules 4 times, was never consistent, made lots of mistakes with the fundamental rules of the system, and called me a cheater. I finally gave up when he told me I'd have to re-roll my stats and hps. Even though both stats and hps were rolled in front of him using his own dice, he said I must have cheated. So not only would I have had to re-roll my stats/hps, he also said I'd not be the one to do so, but that the other players would be the ones to do the re-rolls for me. That's when I quit.

Wow, yeah, I don't see any way to fix that. If he's suddenly complaining about your stats at 10th levels, that's a huge problem. He also seems to think you have some magic dice-rolling powers...and I'm not sure how you could convince him otherwise.

Thanks anyway guys. Now I'm looking for a new group, but haven't really seen any. So have been spending my time as I always do in creating different characters. My latest ones were Iceman from Marvel, and Cyborg from DC. Is always fun to make characters, but loads more to get to use them. Hope you all the best, thanks again.

You might try checking out PFS groups in your area. A lot of people use PFS to meet other players and form new home groups. And you can launch a new character whenever a shiny new build catches your fancy.

Claxon wrote:
Yeah, even though the math and statistics are technically against what I am saying, I feel like I have critical threats come up significantly more often with a Nodachi with Improved Critical than a Greatsword with Improved Critical. I realize that all math and statistics disprove this, and as a man of science I should disregard my gut...but dammit higher crit range weapons just seem to work out better.

Critical threats do come up more often with 15-10 (30%) instead of 18-20 (20%). It's the confirmation that levels things out.

Just grabbing the numbers off of the level 12 example, here's the breakdown:

With both weapons (single attack), you hit 65% of the time and miss 35% of the time.

With the great sword, that 65% breaks down as
Regular hit: 45.00%
Critical threat that doesn't confirm: 7.00%
Confirmed critical: 13.00%

With the nodachi, that 65% breaks down as
Regular hit: 35.00%
Critical threat that doesn't confirm: 10.50%
Confirmed critical: 19.50%

So your nodachi has a 10 percent higher chance to threaten a critical hit, but only a 6% higher chance to confirm the crit.

(Also, remember that you still have to hit, so your crit threat can never be higher than your chance to hit. If you only hit on a 17, it doesn't matter if your weapon threatens a crit on a 15.)

But again, the difference in damage over the long haul is not significant unless you start building for crits: Critical Focus, additional damage on a crit, Bless Weapon, etc. (With Critical Focus, the nodachi moves up to about 2.5 points more damage per round.)

So all the math boils down to "play what you like".

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xexyz wrote:
I'm designing a couple of big hitting martials (a bloodrager and a TWW Fighter) and am trying to decide between using a greatsword or a nodachi as the characters' preferred weapons. I'm leaning toward the nodachi because of the extra crit range, but am curious; what does the math say? Both characters will have the improved critical feat.

TWW fighter is the Two-Weapon Warrior archetype: you can't do that with a two-handed weapon.

Did you mean Two-Handed Fighter instead?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

All other bonuses being the same, they are less than 1 point per round different, from level 1 to level 8, even after Improved Crit at level 8. At level 10, the nodachi pulls ahead to just over 1 point per round, and it gradually increases after that, but I don't see it getting beyond 2 points different with all other factors being equal. (It's almost like the Devs planned it that way, or something.)

Assuming full BAB, Power Attack, weapon specialization (level 4) and rage capability, here's the breakdown (18 STR, CR=level +1, no concealment/mirror image/DR/etc. considered):

Level 1 through level 4 (weapon focus, rage, PA):
Great sword: 13.9 DPR
Nodachi: 13.3 DPR

Level 4: (add PA bump, +1 weapon)
Great sword: 15.7 DPR
Nodachi: 15.9 DPR

Level 6 (Add weapon spec, first iterative, +2 STR)
Great sword: 32.3 DPR
Nodachi: 33.1 DPR

Level 8 (Add improved crit, PA bump)
Great sword: 32.5 DPR
Nodachi: 33.5 DPR
(There's always a drop in DPR at level 8/CR 9 because there's a jump in monster average AC; this effectively cancels the effect of the PA bump and the improved crit.)

Level 10 (Add +2 to STR, +1 to weapon)
Great sword: 42.7 DPR
Nodachi: 44.1 DPR

Level 12 (Add 2nd iterative, PA bump, +1 to weapon)
Great sword: 50.2 DPR
Nodachi: 51.5 DPR

Net result? use whatever you want.

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

Bartholomäus wrote:
My Savage Technologist/Gun Tank just uses a Gauntlet as his off-hand weapon. No mess.

This is one of those interesting "edition" issues like the potion sponge.*

A gauntlet completely covers your fingers, but the text doesn't mention any penalty on dexterity checks.

A cestus specifically leaves your fingers free, allowing you to carry or wield items in that hand, but you take a -2 penalty on skills like Disable Device.

Now, logically, having you fingers completely covered (in anything) makes it harder to use them. So does the penalty on the cestus imply that when you use a gauntlet, you can't use skills like Disable Device at all and we just never realized it? Otherwise, why is there a penalty on these skills when you have more freedom of movement in your fingers?

*Until the introduction of the potion sponge, nothing in the rules indicated that you can't drink a potion underwater; once the potion sponge appeared, it implied that you were never able to drink a potion underwater. However, until someone mentioned it, you never had a problem with it. (Like looking down when you run off a cliff in a cartoon.)

Unarmed strikes count as light weapons, so you can use Weapon Finesse and Piranha Strike. Since monk's don't have an off hand for unarmed strikes, you'll get the full damage bonus for all attacks. (Weapon Finesse is also on the Flowing Monk bonus feat list.)

If you have a 13 strength, you can do the same thing with Power Attack, but you'll still probably want Weapon Finesse to improve your attack rolls.

Flowing Monk/Monk of the Iron Mountain can be a really solid battlefield control build. You won't be dealing the most damage on the field, but you can be very effective.

Also, the Dervish Dance text says "carrying" a shield not "wielding" a shield: "You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand."

So I would say you can't even wear the buckler strapped to your arm while using Dervish Dance, even if you're not getting shield bonus to AC. So for example, casters who wear bucklers can cast with their off hand ("You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn"), but they still wouldn't be able to use Dervish Dance.

Darts are actual weapons, whereas the others are ammunition. So you can draw ammunition as part of the action of loading the weapon, but darts take the normal move action to draw a weapon.

On first read, I assumed they wouldn't stack, but then there's this line in Zen Archer: "A zen archer’s flurry of blows otherwise functions as normal for a monk of his level." On closer read, all the Zen Archer modification does is restrict the weapons that the monk can use to flurry.

This is the same functional modification (and much of the same text) as the Monk of the Empty Hand:

Starting at 1st level, a monk of the empty hand can make a flurry of blows using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with an improvised weapon. He may not make a flurry of blows with any other weapons, including special monk weapons. A monk of the empty hand’s flurry of blows otherwise functions as normal for a monk of his level.

If the Sacred Fist flurry stacks with the normal Monk flurry for level-dependent features (BAB, iterative attacks, etc.), it seems like it should also stack for Monk of the Empty Hand. I would say that if it stacks for Monk of the Empty Hand, it should stack for Zen Archer, too.

If it doesn't stack with normal Monk flurry at all, then this is a moot point.

If you want the highest DPR on a melee monk, you're probably looking at a Weapon Adept monk flurrying with a two-handed monk weapon (temple sword should work, or you can burn a feat for one of the exotic weapons) and Power Attack. You get Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization for free, which keeps you fairly close to the fighter in damage output when you flurry. You'll miss weapon training, but in the 12 levels of PFS, that won't put you too far behind.

If you want a battlefield control melee character, I second Kazumetsa's suggestion for Flowing Monk. My husband runs a Flowing Monk/Monk of the Iron Mountain, and through level 8, he's been amazingly effective. He uses Redirection and Ki Throw to drop enemies prone between two allies, so your other melee partners suddenly get +6 to hit and an AoO when the poor sap tries to stand up. He single handedly kept 9 enemies outside of a building for 4-5 rounds while the rest of the team handled the actual mission.

Some people will suggest Sohei monk, but I think it takes too long for that archetype to get going for PFS. By the time you get your weapon training, your career is half over. Sohei seems better suited for a game that goes higher than 12 levels.

Kazaan wrote:

PRD/Combat wrote:
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.
Two very important things to note here. 1) "You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack," is an independent clause while "even when it is not your turn." is a subordinate clause and, more specifically, an adverbial clause rather than a noun clause. You (subject) threaten (verb) "all squares into which you can make a melee attack" (direct object noun clause) "even when it is not your turn" (adverbial clause modifying threaten). "Even when it is not your turn" is modifying "threaten", that is to say you threaten even when it is not your turn. It is not modifying the direct object clause; if it did, there would be no comma and you'd take, "all squares into which you can make a melee attack...

Don't you wish there were a way to diagram sentences in ASCII?

Sniggevert wrote:
I'd try masterwork dance shoes or the like before pole to be honest... Possibly scarves or finger cymbals depending on the type of dance your character would be performing.

Believe it or not, a quality scimitar or shamshier (sp?) is a very important dance prop.

I can play cheap finger cymbals with no problem, but a cheap sword will never balance on my head.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marc Radle wrote:

Once the ranger reaches 4th level, he can use such a wand without needing to rely on the Use Magical Device skill.

A ranger of level 1 - 3 has no caster level and would need to rely on the skill in order to try and use the wand

That is correct for scrolls (spell completion items).

It is not true for wands (spell trigger items).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

An interesting touchstone came up when some of us were discussing whether you are adjacent to your mount: Cleave:

Cleave wrote:
If you hit, you deal damage normally and can make an additional attack (using your full base attack bonus) against a foe that is adjacent to the first and also within reach.

The argument for being considered adjacent to your mount was this: if your mount is not adjacent, it is not a valid target for cleave. Since most GMs thought that attacking the rider and then cleaving the mount was a viable tactic, the mount has to be considered adjacent.

So one the flip side:
If you are considered adjacent to yourself, then cleave can always be used to hit the same target twice. That certainly doesn't sound valid, so you can't be considered adjacent to yourself.

Tarantula wrote:
thorin001 wrote:


Is it your contention then that once you have used your AOO for the round you no longer threaten?
I think the capability of making an AoO into the square is what matters. Not having an available AoO to make. I.E. While grappled, you are expressly prohibited from making AoOs at all. Therefore, you cannot threaten any squares.

By this argument, if a character takes their AoO, they no longer have the capability to make an AoO, and therefore should not provide a flanking bonus for the rest of that round.

Also, I can only take an AoO if someone provokes an AoO. If I don't threaten unless I can take an AoO and I can only take an AoO if someone provokes it, then how can I provide a flanking bonus unless the bad guy provokes?

Some magic items that help with Bull Rush:

Titanic Armor lets you count as one size category larger for size-dependent maneuvers.

Gauntlets of the Skilled Maneuver (hands slot)

Ring of Adept Maneuvers (requires a ki pool)

Belt of Thunderous Charging or the Gorgon Belt

If you use a shield, there's the Ramming ability.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just from an in play perspective, you might have him announce the bonuses before he rolls. So before the d20, "First attack is plus 11" or before the damage rolls, "This is dice plus 13". That way, if he feels he's too slow adding up the result, other people at the table can chime in and help. (Likewise, if nobody chimes in, he might be able to relax and stop thinking he's too slow.)

When dropping tons of dice, it's usually fastest to group them into sets of five and ten. Instead of trying to add up 7d6, find a six and a four, etc. Then count your sets and add the leftovers. (I learned that trick playing Hero System, where 10 or 20 d6 was common and you actually had to count them two different ways. It's exponentially faster for most people.)

If he really enjoys channeling, you can look at the Malleable Holy Symbol and the Ring of Protected Life.

Krell44 wrote:
While looking through the Ultimate Equipment book I happened upon the Phylactery of Positive Channeling which is right up my sons alley as he loves to channel energy. If I'm reading the text correctly he does 2d6 additional damage to undead, AND 2d6 additional healing to others (his party members). If this is the case we will upgrade his armor, buy a cloak of resistance +1, and then save up for this item.

This is correct. My cleric/ranger uses this to counteract the drop in channel dice from the multiclass.

The only issue with the phylactery is that it takes up your headband slot, so you have to use ioun stones to increase your wisdom or charisma. Unfortunately, none of the ioun stones stack, and they only come in a +2 variety. (They are also more expensive than a headband.)

So you trade off an extra 2d6 of channeling for a max +2 to your wisdom and charisma. It's worked for my cleric because she's a buffing cleric only, but if you cast offensive spells, you'll want to keep your casting stats as a high as possible.

Undone wrote:
I'm aware of the Wis/Wis Ac issues but it doesn't matter to me. What matters is does flurry stack from both sources.

Interesting question. My first instinct was that it wouldn't stack, but on second read, I'm not sure:

Zen Archer Flurry wrote:
Starting at 1st level, a zen archer can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action, but only when using a bow (even though it is a ranged weapon). He may not make a flurry of blows with his unarmed attacks or any other weapons. A zen archer does not apply his Strength bonus on damage rolls made with flurry of blows unless he is using a composite bow with a Strength rating. A zen archer’s flurry of blows otherwise functions as normal for a monk of his level.

Since Sacred Fist flurry says "This ability works like the monk ability of the same name", there's a chance it might stack.

Undone wrote:

I mean I think the two best choice for arrays are

STR: 14 DEX: 14 CON: 14 INT: 12 WIS: 18 CHA: 5
And for the more combat oriented
STR: 14 DEX: 13 CON: 15 INT: 7 WIS: 20 CHA: 5

I just cannot fathom buying a 19. It's so cost ineffective points wise. You waste your 12th level point bump if you start with an odd stat.

Since PFS usually tops out at 12th level, that's not usually a concern.

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

2 people marked this as a favorite.
René P wrote:
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?

Why did he bring it up? What was the point of letting you know?

If he was planning to cheat with metagame knowledge, he probably wouldn't have told you.

If his comment was "I've run this before, so I'm going to take a back seat and let you guys control things", then it's cool. Polite, even. Some of our GMs even let the rest of the group choose which character they play because that they don't want to let their metagame knowledge influence what character they play.

If his comment was "I've already read this, so you'd better get it right", then not cool.

If it was "I've run this before and it gets kind of tricky--let me know if you have any questions", probably cool, if a little presumptuous.

blahpers wrote:

I didn't think the rules covered this, but Bane Wraith's trick should work! Grapple lets you move an opponent to an adjacent square. The rules for three-dimensional combat extrapolate the square cell model to cubes. So place the opponent in the cell five feet above its current position. You cannot be prone in mid-air, so this would render the opponent no longer prone. The opponent would then fall 5 feet to the ground, landing on his or her feet.

You might be limited to a creature whose weight wouldn't cause you to hit your carrying capacity, though, since that's the limit of what you can lift over your head--though I suppose you could flavor it as flinging the opponent upward rather than lifting him or her if the GM is down with it. Also, when their next action comes up, they can drop prone again as a free action. But if it's still useful to you, go for it.

Reposition can be used for this in a similar fashion and doesn't require an attack roll.

So if you have a creature grappled and adjust them 5 feet in the air...can you then pin them so they can't move?

Can you drop prone if you can't move?

Bigguyinblack wrote:

My PFS Zen Archer is now level 6 and I can offer some thoughts.

1. Cold Iron and Silver are cheap but you will want access to Durable arrows for Adamantium. You will also want Ghost Salt Blanch.

My ZA (Level 8) uses cold iron durable exclusively, with weapon blanches to let them count as two materials for DR. (Alchemical silver has a -1 penalty to damage, if you care.)

Bigguyinblack wrote:
3. At level 4 assuming you have bought a +2 to Wis item you will have an AC of 10 base +6 Wis +1 Monk +4 Wand of Mage Armor +2 Barkskin +1 Dex =24 AC. 25 if you have bought a Ring of Protection. Being in the front line is relatively safe for you and you won't have to sweat attacks of opportunity for firing in melee or the -4 for shooting past allies.

At 6th level, cover won't be a problem, but you're right. With unarmed strike, you can also provide a flanking bonus for your melee fighters.

Bigguyinblack wrote:
5. Zen Archer tops out in sweetness at level 6 and the only Quinggong ability I really like is Barkskin so at levels 7-9 I plan to go Fighter (Weapon Master). The extra feats are nice but the real goal is the Weapon Training at level 3 + Dueling Gloves will not only make it harder to Disarm or Sunder me but will give me an extra +3 to hit and dmg.

There are a couple other interesting ones, but they're situational:Deny Death is a nice one for adventure paths, and Message is always nice if no one else in the group has it. And I am addicted to High Jump: no idea why, I just love it. (My ZA in Rise of the Rune Lords took Shot on the Run just so she can make a standing 45 foot forward leap and shoot at the top of arc.)

The main advantage of sticking with ZA through 7th level is that the Monk's Robe can kick you up to the next break point in AC and Unarmed strike damage. This is especially important if you plan to use a ki point to increase your bow damage to your unarmed strike damage (stack with Lead Blades to get 3d6 with your bow).

The main advantage of ZA 8 is the 4th attack (2nd iterative).

If those two things don't matter to you, then 6th level is a good exit point.]

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

DoubleGold wrote:

Like for example I could ask at the table, how much do you value your character on a scale from 1 to 3. 1 being you don't if it dies and 3 being alot. Now lets assume I wanted to run one of those modules that can be bought as books instead of only the modules that are only pdf files. Some of those modules are killer dungeons. Lets assume it was crypt of the everflame, or emerald sphire, or one of those other dungeons, I don't know them all off the top of my head.

I would at the table, pass notes along to the people who said 3 as long as they kept it to themselves Psst. Traps in spaces, d, e, i, x, y, z. In rooms 88 and 111. Monster info... Here is the info, but keep it to yourself and be honoroble about it. People who said 2 will get vaguer hints.

I would tell the people with inside knowledge not to reveal those traps until last. Ie. let the people who don't have inside knowledge go ahead of you and let them decide if they want to search for traps or not, then have those with inside knowledge go second and roll their perceptions, take 10 or take 20.

A couple of thoughts:

First, if character death is an issue, make sure you check the reviews and GM discussions for each module or scenario. You can usually get an idea of how deadly it's going to be, then avoid the ones that have too high a death rate. At low levels, you can usually avoid killing characters. At higher levels, characters should have enough prestige or money for a raise dead, so the death isn't really that traumatic. (We have characters in our area who claim they have a death "punch card"--one more death and they get a free sundae!)

Second, having some of the players have advanced knowledge when others don't will be really, really difficult to manage. It's hard not to use metagame knowledge, even accidently, and if they don't use the metagame knowledge, how are they going to keep their character alive?

Third, for dealing with traps and such, don't force your players to ask if they can make perception rolls every 15 feet. Ask them for their standard procedures for "when we come to a door", "when we come to a corner", etc., and then just assume they are always doing that.

I usually collect all the characters' perception bonuses and assume the characters are taking 10 whenever they are walking down the hall of the dungeon, etc. If anyone's take 10 on perception is high enough to beat the DC, I just tell the players what they see. If no one has a high enough bonus, I'll often roll it for them to keep the element of surprise.

Overall, it looks pretty good. The only real issue I see is that you will want to take Precise Shot at level 1, then backfill Point Blank shot at level 2. (Since you don't have to meet the prerequisites, you want the more useful feat first.)

At level 9, you'll want to pick up Clustered Shots.

A couple of suggestions:
Decide whether you want to pick up Snap Shot. If you do, you'll have to burn a feat on Rapid Shot.

I've seen people do OK with the vow of truth in PFS, but you're probably going to have difficulty with the Vow of Silence. (You might have trouble with Vow of Silence in any game, but especially in PFS (because you won't have a regular group of characters who can learn your gestures/sign language/etc.)

You might consider dropping your wisdom to 19 at 1st level. You won't use your wisdom to attack until level 3, and you can bump it back up to 20 at level 4. In exchange for being -1 to hit for 1 level, you have a lot more points to spend on your other stats, like bumping your strength up to do more damage, upping your Dex to improve your AC & Reflex save, or minimizing the penalty from low Int and Charisma. (I would actually take it down to 17 to balance the other stats, but that's just personal preference.)

Your saves are going to be pretty good as a monk anyway, and you have a feat devoted to improving them. You might consider swapping Glory of Old for a different trait, if there was another one you had your eye on.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Sarrah wrote:
I mathed out TWF feat chain earlier on someone elses post. According to math, the only time TWF is inferior to not TWF is when you need to roll an 18 exactly to hit (with not TWF).
I'ma have to see that math because from any perspective I can look at it, a couple of hits that might hit are better than a bunch of hits that ain't touching what you're aiming at.

It holds up with my calculations, too; I've also done similar scenarios with Rapid Shot/Flurry and Deadly Aim/Power Attack.

Statistically, if you have above a 35% chance to hit, the additional damage from the extra attack (or from Deadly Aim/Power Attack) makes up for the increased missed chance. At 25% to 35%, you're about equal, and at 20% and below, you're better off not using the extra attack or Power Attack.

For power attack/deadly aim, it isn't just based upon your accuracy, it also has to do with your average damage before said power attack/deadly aim.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Assuming all other things are equal (weapon size, strength bonus, etc.), your average damage increases with Power Attack or Deadly Aim until the attack penalty drops your chance to hit below 35%. It evens out at that point, and gets worse from there. I've seen this hold true for really every scenario I've run, from 1st to 12th level, ranged and melee, single and full attacking.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Also - both are more useful at low levels. I know people go on and on about it scaling. The damage does. The overall benefit doesn't.

As you level, the damage goes up (numerical bonus) while the accuracy penalty also goes up (percentage decrease).

It actually scales up pretty well, except for the break points (oddly enough). So up through level 7 (assume full BAB), PA/DA is beneficial. At level 8, it hurts your damage output, even dropping you behind the amount of damage you did at level 7. At level 9, it comes back to slightly positive, and then becomes actually beneficial at level 10 and 11. There's a drop in damage output again at level 12, but it's still positive. (I think this is because there's a simultaneous jump in the average creature's AC at CR 9 and CR 13, based on the Monster creation guidelines.)

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
As for the TWF being useful so long as you can hit easier than an 18, that's only true so long as all other things are equal. (you aren't using a bigger weapon, no shield instead of TWF, no benefits from other feats etc)

Well, since this was a thread on TWF, I assumed that all the other possibilities and options outside of TWF are irrelevant.

In context, I read Sarrah's comment to mean "you should always take the second attack unless the attack penalty means you need an 18 or better to hit". (I call it at a 17 or better, but that's probably because my spreadsheet takes it out to 3 or 4 decimal places. The difference in damage output between the two are negligible in the real world.)

Rynjin wrote:
Sarrah wrote:
I mathed out TWF feat chain earlier on someone elses post. According to math, the only time TWF is inferior to not TWF is when you need to roll an 18 exactly to hit (with not TWF).
I'ma have to see that math because from any perspective I can look at it, a couple of hits that might hit are better than a bunch of hits that ain't touching what you're aiming at.

It holds up with my calculations, too; I've also done similar scenarios with Rapid Shot/Flurry and Deadly Aim/Power Attack.

Statistically, if you have above a 35% chance to hit, the additional damage from the extra attack (or from Deadly Aim/Power Attack) makes up for the increased missed chance. At 25% to 35%, you're about equal, and at 20% and below, you're better off not using the extra attack or Power Attack.

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

DoubleGold wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
That is pretty well frowned upon.

but not illegal?

As well as roll counter 20's to try to make the monsters roll 1?. I have some late middle school/early high school players wanting to do pathfinder. Problem is the modules I want to do are mostly hard stuff, so I'm trying to find ways to ensure their characters survive.

edit: I didn't just quote that one part, this was written before you edited.

DoubleGold, why don't you describe some of the concerns you have and some of the outcomes you are trying to achieve? We might have other suggestions on how to get the results you are after. Others have already made some really good suggestions, and I know the people on this board are really capable and willing to help if they understand what you're trying to do.

For example, what are you trying to achieve by giving them copies of the module? What benefit do you think it will provide them?

One other thing you should consider: Do you want your players to be able to take their characters to other PFS games in your area? If so, then you'll need to play by PFS rules. If not (e.g., if you want them all to stay at the same level), then you might be better off avoiding PFS rules to keep the characters in a single game.

Gauss wrote:

The is how I would use the shield spell on a monk:

Cracked Vibrant Purple Prism Ioun Stone (2000gp, p49 of seeker of secrets, stores 1 spell level)

Wand of Shield

Ranks in UMD. Keep trying to use it on your ioun stone between battles. When battle starts, use the shield spell stored in the ioun stone.

Note: The ioun stone only stores minimum magic (ie: CL1) so there is no reason for the wand to be more than CL1 either.

Alternately: 1 level of Wizard + the Trait Magical Knack (+2CL)

As for the force ring, I would say no..a Monk cannot use it because the wording states it is as a shield.

- Gauss

There's also the Cloak of the Hedge Wizard, abjuration. It takes the shoulder slot, but it lets you cast Resistance and Prestidigitation at will, and Shield and Endure Elements once per day. At only 2500 gp, it's a great option for lower level characters.

OverLordXIII wrote:

Its a 20point buy starting a 3rd lvl and going to 13th lvl. I am hoping to make him good with skill and still able to do combat.

So far I have thought for stats.

Str 16
Dex 12
Con 12 (10+2)
Int 16
Wis 10 (8+2)
Cha 8 (10-2)

Your wisdom should be 12, shouldn't it? (10+2, not 8+2)

OverLordXIII wrote:


I am kind of clueless on what feats I should take. I have been thinking about taking Med armor prof at 1st lvl to give myself a better ac with my low dex.

Unless you are opposed to multiclassing, I would take your first level class as one that gets medium armor as a class feature. It gives you a lot more benefit than just medium armor proficiency:

Fighter: all martial weapons, BAB 1, free bonus feat. If you want to deal damage in combat, try Power Attack as your bonus feat.

Barbarian: all martial weapons, BAB 1, fast movement, and rage as a "last resort" option. And a d12 for your first hit die.

Cleric: domain powers and access to the divine spell list. Since you won't be doing much UMD with an 8 charisma, having a spell list will help when you find wands and scrolls.

Warpriest: similar to cleric, but with blessings instead of domain powers.

Ranger: all martial weapons, BAB 1, favored enemy. Side benefits of lots of skill points compared to the other martial classes and the ability to use some wands.

Bloodrager: all martial weapons, BAB 1, rage, bloodline power when raging, fast movement, plus the ability to use some wands.

A dip into any of those classes will get you medium armor proficiency and save your 1st level feat for something you really want. Some you might consider:
Breadth of Experience to do any knowledge or craft or profession check untrained (I think this is a killer feat for an Investigator)
Iron Hide to boost your AC

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are some magic items that might help, but they are pretty expensive:

Ring of protected life: Allows a swift channel once per day, increases the range of channel by 5 ft radius, and allows the cleric to select out one additional enemy.

Channeler's Aspergillum: Fill it with holy water 3 times a day to cast Mass Cure Light Wounds.

Insignia of Valor: (Also requires Smite Evil) Can channel as a swift action when you drop an evil foe.

Phylactery of the Shepherd: Gives you the Status spell, and lets you end the spell to affect one creature with a channel as a swift action.

There are some other options if the main goal is keeping everyone alive while the cleric gets to do something else:
Phylactery of Positive Channeling: Increases your channel dice by 2d6. (Takes the headband slot, though, which sucks for a cleric.)

Shawl of Life Keeping: Lets the wearer store 10 hit points in the shawl, and they transfer back to you if you drop to -1 hit points.

Aegis of Recovery: Automatically casts Cure Mod on the wearer if you drop below zero hit points (every barbarian should have one).

Lastly, our group has had excellent luck with the spell Symbol of Healing:
Our GM ruled that the Hellknight's shield was a large enough surface to carry a symbol, so my cleric casts this spell on the shield every day (unless it wasn't triggered the day before). Since you can set the trigger to activate the spell to as complicated a condition as the GM allows, we set it to "One of us steps into the area and says 'Ow! That really hurt!'"

It's an area effect cure mod that lasts 10 minutes per level and can cure a creature once per day. It lets the combatants control their own healing a lot more, so it frees up my cleric to do other stuff.

Side note:
A Reach metamagic rod and an Extend metamagic rod will help maximize your cleric's other spells, so that will let the cleric get a bigger "bang for the buck" on the rounds that they don't have to heal.

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

Devil's Advocate, it might help to take a step back and define the problem you're hoping to solve. If I'm reading your posts correctly, the underlying questions are A) "Would the ability to rerun a scenario for GM credit impact what scenarios GMs would be willing to run?" and B) "If so, do we want to allow multiple GM credits to encourage GMs to rerun scenarios they normally would not?"

For question A, we actually have some data that could potentially tell us how much impact it might be having: Since GMs already can get credit multiple times for running replayable scenarios and modules, we could try to look at how many times GMs have rerun the replayable scenarios vs. rerun the non-replyable scenarios. We could then compare that to how many times players in the area have replayed those same scenarios.

Here's my theory:
Outcome 1: If we see that GMs are rerunning the replayable scenarios at about the same rate as the non-replayable scenarios, then the ability to getting credit for re-running a scenario is probably not having that high an impact on the GMs as they decide what to run.

Outcome 2: If we see that GMs are rerunning the replayable scenarios at a much higher rate but there are not a lot players replaying those same scenarios, that probably indicates that GMs are running the same scenarios multiple times in response to player request.

Outcome 3: If we see that GMs are rerunning the replayable scenarios at a much higher rate combined with a high rate of players replaying those same scenarios, that might indicate that GMs are focusing on running the scenarios they can get credit for and essentially "forcing" players to replay those same scenarios. (Note: I said "might"--there can be several other reasons, like the GM hasn't had time to prepare another scenario, it was the only scenario everyone could play, etc.)

If we see Outcome 3, then we should definitely move on to discuss question B.

If we see Outcome 1 or 2 or we can't get the data to check for something like this, then we'll have to rely on self-reported attitudes from GMs and impressions from players or coordinators. In that case, I would start a new thread with question A: "Would you be more willing to rerun a scenario if you could get credit for multiple times?"

Then move on from there.

There's certainly nothing wrong with considering possible mechanisms or schemes of allowing GMs to rerun scenarios for credit, but unless there's an visible issue or a known problem to be solved, it will probably be all theorycrafting.

Paulicus wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:
Paulicus wrote:
Figure out how to make it work. Don't be that kind of GM, nobody likes him.
Unfortunately, some of us play in environments where we are not allowed to the bend the rules or make up new ones, no matter how much we'd like to.
I assume you're referring to PFS. I also play PFS, and that's just not accurate. Yes, us PFS GMs can't go about ignoring the rules, but we're not automatons that are required to run the rules like a computer script. It says right in the guide that PFS GMs will need to adjudicate situations that come up not covered by the rules, just like this one. Do you GMly responsibility and figure out how to make it work.

But this situation is absolutely covered by the rules, as everyone else on this thread has painstakingly explained. It's just that you don't like the rules, so you want to ignore them. You can't do that in PFS. I'm sorry, but sometimes players can't do what they want because what they're trying to do is explicitly against the rules.

Letting a character purposefully end their movement in an illegal space is against the rules. Matthew Downie already gave a brilliant example how abusive this could be if you decided to allow it.

Likewise, you can't take a move action, stop and take a move equivalent action, and then continue the original move action. I don't care what the move equivalent action in the middle is, and I don't care how far you've moved on either side: it's against the rules.

I seriously doubt anyone is going to come and strip your PFS GM license for opening a door.

That kind of depends on what's on the other side of the door.

Suppose my bad guys are in this situation and I let one of them break the rules to open the door. Then his three buddies full attack the player in the doorway, and he dies.

Now imagine that the players specifically closed the door to hold off the bad guys and long enough to give their cleric a chance to heal them. Oops.

Or imagine what happens when your player sits down at my table and I'm using a completely different set of rules (from his perspective).

And while you claim "it just opening a door", it really isn't. It's giving someone three move actions in a single round. If I start randomly giving bad guys additional actions just because "it makes sense to me", I absolutely should be stripped of my PFS GM license. (Of course, there's no such thing as a PFS GM license, so that's just hyperbole anyway.)

In fact, making the game run more smoothly and less like a video game gives a better impression and is more fun for newer players. We want new players to have a good experience so they come back and PFS can grow. Strict video-game logic doesn't do that.

Since I don't actually play video games, I can't comment on this.

Tarantula wrote:
I like the idea of, if you aren't in combat, just say who opens the door. If you are in combat, then yes, it matters, because you'd be in the way of your friend who is in a fighting stance and ready to defend himself.

Oh, absolutely. If we're not in combat. this entire discussion is unnecessary.

(It actually never occurred to me that it might not be in combat--good catch!)

Kchaka wrote:
I know, I'm beeing picky with the words, but since so many here like to use RAW as a God given text, in a matter almost zombie like, I feel I have the right to do the same on my point's defense.

You absolutely do have that right, but please understand that a lot of people on these boards play in organized play campaigns where we can't change the rules. "Zombie-like" adherence to RAW is more like "constrained by the context of how we play".

Also note that the question was not "SHOULD Power Attack get the full bonus on the off hand when used in conjunction with Double Slice?" The question was "(Within the rules as currently written and the most recent set of FAQs,) DOES Power Attack get the full bonus on the off hand when used in conjunction with Double Slice?" For this question, "it makes sense" does not count unless there is a contradiction or lack of clarity.

Any type of flurry is irrelevant. Double Slice only applies when you are attacking with two weapons under the combat rules for two weapon fighting.

Double Slice says "Add your Strength bonus to damage rolls made with your off-hand weapon."
It does not say "treat your off hand weapon as if it were your primary hand" or "negate any penalties associated with using a weapon in your off hand". Like people said earlier, these two feats have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

So the discussion has to focus completely on the text of Power Attack.

The current text for Power Attack from the PRD is

This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.

There's no ambiguity there. It doesn't say anything about "if your str bonus is halved". It says "if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon." When using two weapon fighting, you are using an off-hand weapon, regardless of what that weapon is.

Your arguments do bring up an interesting question:
If you have some trick that lets you use a two-handed weapon in one hand without changing the category of the weapon, you could potentially use that weapon in your off hand. In that case, how would you apply the Power Attack bonus?

I think you'd need to check each of those tricks individually, but the best you could get by RAW is take 1.5 times the PA bonus (for using a two handed weapon) and then divide that by 2 (for using it in your off hand). You won't see any difference until your PA mods are -2/+4, and you'd get +3 (4*1.5/2)on your off-hand instead of +2 (4/2).

It's a corner case, and the penalties for using that weapon in your off hand would b monstrous, but that's how I would rule it.

Final note:
My two weapon fighters would LOVE for Power Attack or Piranha Strike to work the way you're arguing. I desperately want them to work that way, and I agree that it does make sense. Unfortunately, they just don't unless you house rule it.

And you are always free to house rule it that way, but some of us can't do that.

Ma Gi wrote:

They don't but I feel like in that sense potions are almost useless. I don't use potions much and would much rather purchase the on going effect. I would definitely consider using them if they stacked. And I don't think that an extra +2 attack and damage ultimately makes the large-scale difference, but enough difference to sacrifice an action to drink it.

What are your thoughts on house ruling them to stack? Broken? Meh?

Potions are extremely useful at lower levels when you can't afford ongoing items. You can also use potions for stats that aren't covered by the item or to raise an enhancement bonus from +2 to +4 (this works until you have a +4 Belt of Str/Dex/Con @ 64,000 gp).

Potions are awesome unless you a) always have a buff-dedicated caster in the party or b) only ever start play at 10th level or higher.

As far as whether to take the action to drink the potion vs full attack, that's situtational. Most of the time, taking a round out of combat to buff is not worth it. If you need to get past DR or you can't hit the beastie or need to get your con or dex up to survive the next few rounds, then it's probably a good idea. Usually you want to get buffs going the round before you engage, or anytime you're otherwise prevented from making a full attack (waiting for the flyer to come down to you, having to move from one fight to the next, etc.). Or you want someone else taking their actions to buff you while you continue to attack.

You could do a Sohei monk archetype. The sohei can take weapon training at 6th level, then he can flurry with any weapon he has training in.

SteelDraco mentioned Crusader's Flurry: you'd have to flurry with your deity's favored weapon, too. Iomedae uses a long sword, and Ragathiel uses a bastard sword, but that's probably as close as you'll get.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think there are some more relevant examples out than the temporary vs. permanent ability scores.

For example, there are several magic items that grant the user a feat or feature, and these will not work under specific conditions (anti-magic field, dispelled, user removes them, etc.).

Anaconda's Coils wrote:
(from here) In addition, the belt grants the wearer the constrict ability (Bestiary 298) for 1d6 points of damage plus the wearer’s Strength modifier.

I've seen a lot of people use this item to qualify for the Final Embrace feat, and I haven't heard anyone suggest this doesn't work.

There are several ioun stones with this feature, also:
Scarlet and Green Cabochon: Endurance feat
Dark Blue Rhomboid: Alertness feat
Orange Thorny: Alertness or Acrobatic (resonant power)
Deep red sphere: Improved Unarmed Strike (resonant power)
Incandescent blue sphere: Blind fight (resonant power)

Again, I've seen players use these items to qualify for feats, even though they are less "permanent" than a belt (can be target by enemies, removed from the wayfinder, etc.), and I've never seen them questioned.

Also, now we have the Brawler's martial flexibility feature, where a Brawler can learn a new feat for one minute and use that as the prerequisite for another temporary feat. Granted, the Brawler can learn that feat for one minute and then choose a new level feat, however, I would argue that the "persistence" or "permanence" of the swashbuckler's evasion is much closer in nature to the magic items than to the martial flexibility.

I think there are enough examples of "non-permanent" feats and features used to qualify for another feat that I would allow swashbuckler's evasion to count as a prerequisite for something.

Paulicus wrote:
Figure out how to make it work. Don't be that kind of GM, nobody likes him.

Unfortunately, some of us play in environments where we are not allowed to the bend the rules or make up new ones, no matter how much we'd like to.

As a GM, I always have the players tell me what they want to do and then figure out how to make it work. But sometimes the rules just do not support what the player wants to do, and as an organized play GM, I can't just waive the rules. Now, I can't ignore the rules for the monsters either, so the bad guys would be in the exact same situation.

In this case, if the door opens away from you and was not locked or heavy, I might allow you to essentially bull rush the door and continue moving through it. But if you can't do enough damage or roll high enough on your strength check, the door would still be closed and you'd be shunted back to the closest available space. And even if you did open the door, you'd be moving into the room blindly, and you'd probably want to go at least 10 feet so you're not blocking the doorway. (I'd make sure to tell the you all of the consequences before you took your action: I'm not trying to trick players in to getting themselves killed.)

If the door towards you, I wouldn't allow that, because you have to stop your forward motion and pull the door in the opposite direction (which is why that counts as ending your first move action before you can open the door).

However, what I would do is ask the players how they ended up in that situation. Why are your three friends standing in front of the door when none of them has an action to open it? Where are the bad guys in this situation?

Then I'd suggest some tactical adjustments to avoid this kind of thing in the future, like leaving an empty square behind the guy in front, leaving gaps in your marching order so you can switch places, not putting the 20-foot movement people further than 15 ft behind the front person, etc.

If you do decide to go into melee, consider the Channel Smite feat. It solves your "no selective channel" problem, too, but at the expense of only damaging one enemy per round. (The real damage-per-round advantage of channeling to harm is damaging all enemies at the same time. But if you're not channeling every round anyway, Channel Smite will let you do more damage in melee.)

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Dafydd wrote:
My point in posting this question was to hope to get a REAL ruling on do you use 1 hand with a light weapon. By my reading, a light weapon IS a one handed weapon that can be used in a grapple. However, as had been made obvious by many posters, simple logic like this is rare.

Here's the source of the confusion:

Does the phrase "one-handed slashing weapon" refer to "a slashing weapon wielded in one hand" (your reading) or "a slashing weapon from the pre-defined category One-Handed Weapons"?

If you go with the second reading, whether you use a light weapon in one hand is completely irrelevant: light weapons are not listed in the tables titled "One-Handed Weapons", nor do they appear in the fighter weapon groups with other one-handed weapons (the "Heavy Blades" group, in this case).

Unfortunately, there is significant evidence that the second reading is the correct one (numerous examples of the phrasing "a light or one-handed weapon" in the various rule books, threads discussing the playtest of the Advanced Class Guide where the feat was introduced, and threads discussing the feat after the Advanced Class Guide was released).

When deciding rules questions (kind of like law questions), you start with the exact wording of the rules. If that's not clear, you can consider similar wording used elsewhere (precedent). If that's still not clear, you can search for discussion threads where the developers of the rule talk about what they meant (legislative intent). "Logic" is the absolute last thing to rely on because "logic" or "what makes sense" can be very subjective). If it's still not clear or if you disagree with the rule, you can always ask for an FAQ (take it to court).

Fortunately, with RPG rules (unlike with laws), if you disagree with the rule as written or as intended, you are always free to change it or just ignore it as a house rule. (While you're at it, I recommend house-ruling Piranha Strike to be usable with any finessable weapon instead of just "light weapons"--that's the other side of this whole discussion.)

Those of us who play in organized campaigns, however, don't have the luxury of making house rules, so we'll diligently search for precedent and intent. Since we rely on precedent and need to come to a consensus among multiple GMs, we often lurk around the rules sections of the message boards. And we sometimes end up with rulings that are not logical or that we disagree with (which sucks), but it's the price we pay for playing in an organized campaign.

So what to you is "illogical nit-picking" is, to us, just "due diligence". If you ask the question "What do you want the rule to be" or "How do you think this rule should have been written", you'll get a very different discussion.

Noting that the rule is not logical does not automatically change it (in this case, all the discussions to date about the rule already point out how illogical it is). If you don't like the rule, house rule it.

** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

Cole Cummings wrote:
We were in a house defending a noble from waves of attackers. We spent a good deal of time devising defenses, talking it out and building things to help us. When the bad guys attacked we had one party member who is from what I'm told very experienced with PFS. That party member simply ignored everything we had done and engaged the waves directly, alone. And so we had to join the melee to support. We killed them all. Wave after wave. And barely lost a hit point doing it. Bosses lasted maybe three hits. Minions two at best. It was down right boring and a little annoying to see all that time prepping for the battle have no effect.

There are several scenarios where your preparations actually change the encounter. Mechanically, the more preparations you make, the fewer bad guys get past the defenses to attack you. It's possible your GM didn't explain very clearly (it's an odd mechanic, so the players have no way of knowing what goes on behind the scenes).

1 to 50 of 1,051 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.