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

FullStarFullStarFullStar RPG Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle. 1,904 posts (2,373 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 16 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,904 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Paulicus wrote:

Could you try to Bullrush someone if they're grappling you? Seems mechanically similar to punishing kick, and I can't think of any reason why you wouldn't be able to off-hand. Though it would still be a CMB check and only better if you have special bonuses to bullrush.

In any case, it's a tricky situation in general and can vary based on the situation. In most cases, I'd probably go with giving a free check to break the grapple, maybe with a bonus.

Teleport-style effects would be automatic, I think, assuming you can make them go off (concentration checks are hard in grapples). Isn't there a feat that lets you forcefully follow a teleporter while you grapple them?

Since "Grappled creatures cannot move", I'd say you can't use Bullrush, since bull rush is you moving a target. Reposition might work, though.

Soilent wrote:
They have a filthy half blood abomination baby, that should be thrown in the garbage pits of the glorious Drow nation.

That was generally the experience of my half-drow/half-elf in Rise of the Runelords...both sides hated her equally.

Kjatan wrote:

Would it be possible to add a feature to the forums to Update the original post in a thread?

My other thread, 'Gluing Splash Weapons together', has reached a resolution and has devolved into light exchanges, banter, and repetition. I'd like to be able to update the first post with a TL;DR section with a brief summary of the following conversations, so that people who have similar questions or opinions don't have to dig, or post without reading.

If a feature won't be added for regular users, could a moderator take a pre-written statement, and add it on my behalf?

First, that's a great sentiment on your part.

Second, my usual approach is to favorite the post that seems to "answer" the thread the best. For PFS-oriented threads, I will often put a summary post at the end of the thread that captures the discussion.

Ravingdork wrote:

Earlier tonight in a PFS game, I dropped prone to avoid being pin-cushioned by some annoying archers. The GM proceeded to tell me that I would not be able to use my kinetic blast while prone since the rules state the following:

Prone: The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.


Kinetic blasts count as a type of weapon for the purpose of feats such as Weapon Focus. The kineticist is never considered to be wielding or gripping the kinetic blast (regardless of effects from form infusions; see Infusion on page 12), and she can’t use Vital Strike feats with kinetic blasts.

The GM said that since the kinetic blast was considered a weapon, and was not a crossbow or firearm, then I could not use it while prone.

Was this ruling correct?

I think the key part is the following sentence: "The kineticist is never considered to be wielding or gripping the kinetic blast". If you're never "wielding" the weapon, there shouldn't be any reason you can't use it while prone.

Also, by your GM's ruling, you couldn't use most ranged touch attack spells and alchemist's bombs while prone.

The "take 10" refers to the Acrobatics check to jump, not the distance. To jump 30 feet, you need have an Acrobatics bonus of +20 and then take 10.

Climb movement is different. If you don't have a climb speed, you climb at 1/4 your normal speed with successful climb check. So in a single move action, you can only climb 7.5 feet.

You can combine forms of movement, but you have to remember to count the correct amount of distance for each movement type.

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

Kjatan wrote:
ZenithTN wrote:

Throwing an acid? Fine.

Throwing two acids duct taped together? Improvised weapon (which Throw Anything should mitigate) and you made it bigger, so -2 to hit, and now technically takes two hands. I would only allow Intelligence modifier to damage once.

Which makes it similar to Rapid Shot.

Size shouldn't matter, since it'll still be smaller than a 14lb thrown melee weapon by several size categories, which can be thrown without additional problem beyond normal penalties. I don't think it is ever mentioned whether throwing melee weapons require more hands.

Throwing melee weapons requires the same number of hands they require to wield them (one hand for light and one-handed, two hands for two handed). Throwing a weapon with two hands is also a full-round action.

There is also "soft cover" for ranged attacks, where creatures between you and your target provide +4 AC (but no bonus to reflex saves). That's the one that usually kills most archers.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The opening text of Manyshot says, "When making a full-attack action with a bow". So, no you can't use it with a gun.

Any feat that specifies its weapon can only be used with that weapon.

TriOmegaZero wrote:
In the Pathfinder Society Primer there is the spell Kreighton's Perusal, but that is all I know of.

I love this spell. All my knowledge-based characters keep a wand of this in a spring-loaded wrist sheath. Add a handy haversack with all the the Pathfinder Chronicles in it, and you have +2 to any knowledge check in a single round.

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

Nefreet wrote:
It could be a really nifty RP session as well. Maybe a fellow Pathfinder proselytized their faith particularly well and the PC willing converted.

In Wrath of the Righteous, I have a paladin of Iomedae who multiclassed into Oracle, and she's on the verge of changing deities. She's been listening more and more to the paladin of Shelyn and agreeing with him more often.

Fromper wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

I am a "pick up a bow" person, but I would never say it makes the fight easy. I will say that even doing 5 to 6 points of damage instead of the 30+ per hit that you are used to will help end the encounter a lot faster than doing nothing.

I am not saying you specifically do this, but I have seen games where players were like "I don't have a ranged weapon, and doing (insert low number) won't matter so I just won't do anything".

Exactly. I play Pathfinder Society, so there are various random people at the table each time. I can't even count the number of times we've had a melee guy who didn't even have a ranged weapon at all. They might not finish things off quickly like they would in battle, but at least it lets them help a little against flying foes. Given that you can get a sling and 10 bullets for 1 silver piece, there's really no excuse for anyone not to have a ranged weapon.

Once I watched a magus (in tier 7-11) spend the entire combat yelling at the flying monsters to come down and fight him. He had all his slots filled with meta-magiced shocking grasp and didn't think to have Fly prepped or on a scroll...

I think he would only provoke once. The same action--making a ranged attack--can only provoke one AoO.

Point Blank Master lets that action not provoke. While False Opening says you can choose to provoke with that action, it is still only one action.

(Now if you are shooting multiple times in the same round, I think each shot would provoke, but that's a different case.)

ekibus wrote:

Heretek. figured at level 4 when i get studied target, I would bump the int to 16. Was looking at the traits for Accelerated drinker and student of philosophy, my init will be really poor. Was thinking about a con 12 and then the favored bonus to hp I'll check the fcb for the half elf.

fendel, that is pretty cool the quest i did gives me a free wayfinder and reduces the cost of enh for it by 1.

Even with 8 skill points I'm looking pretty thin on skills

If you go with and elf, gnome, or dwarf, you can pick up Breadth of Experience, which lets you make knowledge checks untrained and gives you a +2 on the check.

That will let you focus your actual skill ranks on the skills that really matter to you. (One note: Heightened Awareness only boosts knowledge skills that you have ranks in, so you won't be able to benefit from that spell as much.)

Snowblind wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
Josh-o-Lantern wrote:
the attacks from Pin Down... can that be a trip attempt?
Anything that can be done as an attack action can be used with bonus attacks, so yes.
That is so dodgy. AFAICT it works by RAW but it's still dodgy in the "clearly not how the feat was intended to work" way, so you should expect massive table variance on it.

How is it dodgy? Trip can replace any attack, including AoOs. This is an AoO.

It also seems perfectly within the spirit of the feat. Someone is trying to move away from you: you want to prevent that. Tripping seems like the ideal method. And trip does no damage, just like Pin Down down does no damage.

I don't quite understand your objection.

dragonhunterq wrote:
JohnF wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:

It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.

So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.

That's incorrect.

You must go +10/5 with first-choice weapon, and (not then) +10/+5 with second-choice weapon (assuming you have an iterative attack with the second weapon).

The rules do not say you must do all your attacks with the first weapon, followed by all your attacks with the second weapon; in fact the rule quoted above (attacks must be taken in order of decreasing bonus) would seem to prohibit that sequence.

The rules also don't say you can split up weapon attacks - you attack with a specific weapon first. Nothing to indicate that you can switch between weapons.

If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first
I can see the argument you make, I would not argue with a GM who wanted me to go +10/+10/+5/+5.

Based on this FAQ, I don't think you can switch hands between attacks when using two-weapon fighting. This FAQ says that you use all your primary hand attacks first (in order form highest to lowest) then use all your off hand attacks.

DM_Blake wrote:

I understand the GM's concern.

Me, I wouldn't. Sandpoint is almost entirely medium population. Their craftsmen won't make stuff for the few rare small locals without a special order. Their merchants won't stock rare/expensive items for a few small people who might never want those things. Sure, a pair of small shoes or pants, yeah, but not expensive stuff - that would be ordered by request only, with half paid in advance no doubt.

But that's unfair to the player who chose the small race. Too bad. Want to find small armor and weapons, go adventure in a land of small people, or go invade a goblin cave, or whatever, but don't expect medium stores in a medium population to have shelves full of all sizes.

Well, if we're going to try to bring realism into it...

According to the Pathfinder Wiki, Sandpoint is 1,116 humans, 37 halflings, 25 elves, 24 dwarves, 13 gnomes, 13 half-elves, and 12 half-orcs. So technically, anything other than "designed to fit a human" would be a special order.

Realistically, there's no way that "one size fits all" for humans, dwarves, and half-orcs, because those races are completely different sizes and shapes. Elves and half-elves can get away with being "really skinny humans", but there's no way dwarf or half-orcs would find anything to fit them at a human-centered shop.

But they're all "medium", so that's perfectly fine.

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

Ascalaphus wrote:
In the cases of hard mode scenarios I've played, the GM secretly polled the players, rather than openly. That takes away some of the peer pressure, too.

That is actually a great idea--I'm going to adopt this technique.

Cheburn wrote:

I know you've built this Fighter as baseline, but have you considered going with the Lore Warden archetype for this build (tripper). I think the flavor of that archetype works well for a 'human raised by gnomes,' and you get:

  • Combat Expertise for free
  • A scaling bonus to your CMB
  • Know Your Enemy (which give additional bonus to CMB when active)

I'm a big fan of the Lore Warden archetype. You also get extra skill points to spend and get all knowledge skills as class skills.

Another possibility for any kind of maneuver build is a one-level Brawler dip. Being able to learn maneuver feats on the fly is a huge advantage. You can avoid all those situation-specific issues. (Oh, you're flying and I can't trip you? Fine--I'll learn Grapple. You don't have a weapon to disarm, Mr. Evil Wizard? How about I sunder your spell component pouch, then? etc.)

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.
outshyn wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
"Hard Mode" also can turn away newcomers.
Huh? Hard mode is optional -- every hard mode comes with mandatory text that states that if even a single player says no, then the game runs as normal. It's impossible for it to turn away newcomers unless the GM and players all collude to pressure a newbie into doing it, which is explicitly not OK by the hard mode rules we've already got in play.

There is a certain amount of inherent peer pressure if you are the only person at the table who doesn't want to play hard mode. It doesn't have to be "collusion"--it's just how things are.

AwesomenessDog wrote:

Helpless specifically calls out held (we can only assume it means pinned) as helpless. (Someone said it refers to the hold person spell which is the same as paralysis but paralysis is already called out as well.)

And once again it may still be technically fiat (I still hold "if you are flatfooted you can't make reflex saves from attack rolls or directly from actions (like spells) at all"), but if you arms are strapped down, you can't shield yourself or react to that fireball.

It is completely fiat.

The only autofailure condition called out in the rules is rolling a natural 1. There's nothing under reflex saves or any of the conditions that says you are denied a reflex save--not under pinned, helpless, paralyzed, petrified, unconscious, etc.

Feel free to rule however you want in your own games, but be aware that that would be a house rule.

Qaianna wrote:

As an experiment, fiddled with PCGen and Hero Lab to see what those guys were told of the rules.

Hero Lab claims that 'Your Hero starts with a free set of clothes that counts as zero weight,' and it seems to stick to that.

PCGen? Weighs you down.

Make of this what you will.

"No clothing weight" is a setting in Hero Lab. You can change that under Configure Hero (scroll to the bottom).

Edit: Never mind--I'm thinking of no coin weight. That's what I get for posting while HL is updating and I can't double-check the setting.

You can use the Encumbrance setting on the Adjustments tab to account for this.

Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn is correct: This isn't a change. Check out Ultimate Combat, where they came out (even the first printing), and you'll see that the first feat is the only one that ever has the Style tag (except when errors happen).

But do those feats still count as "style" feats for purposes of abilities that let you choose bonus "style feats" (such as the Master of Many Styles monk and the Unarmed Fighter) Or are those bonus "style" feat choices limited to only those with the word "style" in the name?

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

3 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the guys in our area has played multiple iterations of the same Time Oracle, with the "bit" being that these different characters are all the same time-traveling character at different points in her timeline. It's pretty fun, actually.

James Langley wrote:

Holy cats. When I first clicked on this, I was like "that is something only a noob would ask."

But I became far less certain as time passed.
Far less certain.

Noobz, you have genuinely shaken my understanding of the foundation of Pathfinder's combat system with this question. This is the kind of madness and tactical genius that I love to see in players.

Mind you, I strictly play 5e now (where this highly interesting situation doesn't even exist), but I would love to get something resembling an official ruling on this matter.

Out of curiosity, if you only play 5e now, what do you gain from hanging out on the Pathfinder rules forum? I'm not sure I see the benefit.

Ferious Thune wrote:
You have Selective Channel. It shouldn't be that difficult to position yourself where you can exclude your allies. Right now your Charisma is 16, so you can exclude 3 allies, which means in a party of 4 (including yourself) it's never an issue (well, except for non-combatants or pets).

That depends on the region. In our area, 6-person tables are the norm, with 5 right after it. I've personally run more 7-person tables than I have 4-person tables. That does not include combat pets. So get a feel for you local area and see what the average table size is.

The other issue is that if your party members are engaging the enemies in melee, it will be very difficult to catch enemies in your channel without catching your party. Eventually, picking up a malleable holy symbol will help.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There's actually a feat for a character that wants to play an elf this way: Breadth of Experience.

SheepishEidolon wrote:

Alright, FAQd.

Well, I happen to know the dev side - you have to work with limited time, limited energy, limited concentration. So extensive arguments can help the cause but sometimes they instead can be counterproductive ('Ugh, so much to read...').

Really? If someone goes through all the source books to gather all the relevant material and combs the threads to collect every argument for or against, then pulls that all into a single place for a FAQ request, you think the devs are not going to read it?

That implies that when the devs respond to an FAQ, they don't review all the relevant materials or consider all the arguments for or against. That implies that the devs make every FAQ response off the cuff or by anal extrusion.

Please tell me that this is not true.

Lune wrote:

Yeah, I can't find the Slashing Grace thread but as I recall someone was making the assertion that it doesn't take up your hand the way a shield does so it makes sense that Slashing Grace can be used with one. It is also historically accurate so there is that.

Somehow I recall someone extrapolating from that that a buckler is not a shield.

The intent of Slashing Grace was that it could be used with bucklers, but the text technically didn't allow that. That was an issue with the Slashing Grace text, though, not because bucklers aren't shields. This was clarified in this FAQ.

I can see someone coming to the conclusion that "bucklers aren't shields", but that's not what the FAQ says.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
sirkydor wrote:
Dread Vanguard of Asmodeus .. killing off Devils that don't fully believe in the path Asmodeus is setting.

I play with a Hellknight who uses a holy weapon: he refers to himself as "Internal Affairs".

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

"That's OK, Tonya can have my seat..." :-)


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

Unklbuck wrote:

The beatstick should always get an Adamantine Weapon as soon as they can afford it....It helps kill constructs and is an Amazingingly good door opener if you don't have on of those sneaky types to unlock the door.

NEVER EVER DUMP CON!!!!...cannot emphasize that enough...HP's are your secondary armor
Sometime you are just going to get beat on by a able to take the hit and get away as soon a possible if you are not the melee guy

Pumping your con is not going to help against enemies that coup de gras in every scenario: you will fail that fort save sooner or later.

DuksisDarker wrote:
Grappling is actually too good. Improved grapple vs someone without it means when they try to break there grapple they provoke. My friend had a tetori monk grippli and he wrecked the battlefield. Grappling a rouge, not so good. Grappling the guy who too only two handed weapon feats, best idea.

You're actually thinking of Counter-Grapple, which is a 4th-level Tetori Monk class ability. Improved Grapple (the feat) just lets you grapple without provoking (and get a +2 on the roll).

It's also not clear whether "breaking a grapple" would count as "attempting to grapple" the monk. Most GMs I know would say "no": "attempting to grapple" is initiating a grapple, not attempting to break out of one.

Like every other tactic, grappling is sometimes devastating to the target and sometimes terrible for the grappler. How often it falls on the "super effective" side depends on the situations you usually run into.

Grappling a caster? Always super-effective.
Grappling a flying creature? Usually pretty effective.
Grappling a large creature with reach? Darned effective if you want to hold him down to let your party members get into position.
Grappling a creature with 5 natural attacks? Not usually so good, but you can mitigate this by fighting defensively, using combat expertise, using Crane Style, etc. (You get +3-4 AC while imposing a -2 attack penalty to the target.)

My tetori describes her role as "I hold things down so you guys can beat on them." In the context, it's almost always super-effective.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you have exactly one weapon with no back up weapons, no bludgeoning weapon, no ranged options, no holy water for haunts, no alchemist's fire or acid for swarms, no grappling hook or rope, etc., sure you will be fine. I personally could not run a character so ill equipped.

My bare-bones non-combat character gear always includes at least 1 spring-loaded wrist sheath (for a wand), sleeves of many garments (so I don't have to waste weight on clothing) and a traveler's anytool: that's 4 lbs, and none of that scales by size.

And there will be a lot of scenarios where you can't bring your pack animal, so anything that you want "at hand" you will have to carry.

As I said, it's doable, and it's much easier as higher levels. I wouldn't do it, but that's me. But I definitely think the OP should know all the pros and cons before making a decision.

Merm7th wrote:
I know how the glove's and touch attacks work. For the exact same question in a non-magic senario. If I'm wield two short swords and wearing gauntlets, and the target is more seceptible to bludgeoning, do I need to drop a sword to hit with the gauntlet?

Merm7th, I think this question got lost in the ongoing argument.

I would let you hold the sword in your hand while using the gauntlet to hit the target. If you had a bulky, awkwardly-shaped, or delicate item in your hand, I might make you drop it, but I can't see that being a problem for a short sword (assuming you don't have a basket hilt on it).

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

Antariuk wrote:

Hey guys,

I am looking for adventures in the veign of Arabian Nights, both in terms of look and feel. Which probably means someting featuring Katapesh, Jalmeray, or Vudra, but not necessarily ('The Harrowing' comes to mind). I've already considered the Legacy of Fire AP and standard adventure modules such as 'Broken Chains'. Can you point me to some PFS scenarios that would fit?

For Arabian Nights, my first though of location would be Qadira. What specific aspects are you thinking for "look and feel"? Genies?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

First, remember that everyone can do a DC 10 knowledge check untrained. And you can take 10. That allows most people to identify common monsters up to CR 5. GMs can allow circumstance bonuses for living in an area where the monsters are from, having a background dealing with particular monsters, etc.

RAW, there is no reason for a GM to insist that players don't have common knowledge about common monsters. That's the GM's choice, not the rules.

Second, as a GM, I insist that "separating player knowledge from character knowledge" goes both ways. If the player is missing a piece of information that the character should know, then I tell the player that information and let them change their action. For example, melee characters know that polearms have reach, casters should know what their spells do, clerics should know the tenets of their deity, etc. Players might not know any of these things, but I don't think it's fair to insist that the character can only know what the player knows and nothing more.

And having been the "new person in the group" multiple times, I can tell you that it's not very welcoming to insist that new players memorize every single rule in every single source book before sitting down to a game.

FLite wrote:

Mithral chainshirt, scimitar, mw backpack, and darkleaf cloths works out to be ~8.75 lbs out of 12 lbs light load, at a cost of 2150 gp + 2 PP.

So he just needs to play up once or twice, and he can do it. Almost everything else he can put on a mule.

First, he can't choose to play up anymore. He has to be in a higher-tier party.

Second, I count at least 4 scenarios where this character will either be struggling under the weight or not have the gear he needs.

And that does not include any of the other gear he'll need, like rope, light source, potions, splash weapons, etc. Oh, and the mule.

I just don't think it's worth the tradeoff, unless you're going to do the "rebuild the character completely before scenario 4" trick.

If you are planning to do it, though, the best approach is probably the wand of Ant Haul and UMD. Sure, you'll burn through the wand by level 5, but 2 pp for 5 levels of usefulness is a pretty good deal.

Encumbrance is going to be your biggest issue. It will reduce your max Dex to AC, and as a Dex-based character, that's going to kill you.

In PFS, you won't have enough money to mitigate your encumbrance until your third scenario at least (even a mithril chain shirt will be too heavy for this character--you'll be better off with darkleaf cloth--you'll probably also need mithril weapons). You won't have enough fame for muleback cords until 2nd level and a handy haversack until 3rd. (The haversack won't help your encumbrance from clothing, weapons, and armor, so you'll still need muleback cords or a wand of Any Haul to increase your carrying capacity.)

The Muscle of the Society trait won't be a big help to this character, because the difference between 5 and 7 is only 7 pounds. Masterwork backpack will barely help, if at all, because it weighs 4 pounds in exchange for increasing your carrying capacity by...4 pounds. (Once your strength is over 10, each point of carrying capacity increase by at least 5 pounds. Below 10, it's either 3 or 4 pounds per point.)

Also, your Climb and Swim skills will be terrible: -3 for your strength in addition to any armor check/encumbrance penalties. You will never be able to take 10 to cross a simple ledge or swim in calm water. And those two skills are really the ones that will kill you if you miss the check.

All in all, you'd be investing most of your gold for your first three levels, your shoulders slot or several skill ranks in UMD, and at least one trait just to counter-act the 5 strength.

I wouldn't call that worth the trade off.

Edit: don't forget that small characters have 3/4 carrying capacity.

There are several rogue talents that let you forgo your sneak attack damage to impose other conditions on your target. You can see if any of those are would work for your character.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.

That many deaths makes me think there's a structural problem. I see a lot of sub-optimal characters and terribly unbalanced parties, and I don't see anywhere near half as many deaths as you cite here.

First, I'd double check that the GMs are running in the correct tier. Most player deaths I've seen are a result of playing up when you shouldn't be. Make sure you're calculating the APL correctly, and remember that you no longer have the option of playing up. Your group needs to be in the right tier, and you need to check the 4-player adjustment.

Second, I'd make sure the GM is following any stated tactics in the scenario. There are many cases where the writers use tactics to rein in the danger or deadliness of an enemy. If GMs ignore these tactics, the characters actually end up facing a much more deadly enemy than the scenario intended. Also, if the GM is regularly hitting characters when they are down, I'd reconsider that tactic unless the scenario indicates that this is the NPC's intent.

Third, I'd make sure everyone actually understands how to play their characters. Especially if you're playing pregens a lot, try to get together early and spend some time reviewing the stat blocks to make sure each player knows how the character works. It's also a good idea to go over strategies as a group, e.g., figure out who can provide flank, who needs a charge lane, who can provide support, who can provide healing, etc.

Fourth, I'd review the rules for hit points below zero, stabilization, etc. Remember that characters don't die until they take enough damage to be at negative Constitution score (NOT Constitution modifier). Characters lose 1 point of damage per round when they are below 0 hp until they stabilize, which usually gives them enough time to get some healing. Remember that it only takes a DC 15 heal check to stabilize a dying character, that you can make that check untrained, and that you can take 10 when combat it over.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Master of Shadows wrote:
Where is the springloaded wrist sheath from? I looked in Arms and equipment and technology guide, but didn't find it.

Adventurer's Armory.

Archives of Nethys is my go-to source for finding out what source book something is from: he even has the pages so you can double-check Additional Resources for PFS legality.

I've gotten into the habit of verbally adding up all the bonuses/penalties before I roll the dice, and announcing "OK, this is at +8" or whatever.

I started doing it to cut down on retroactively second-guessing my math ("That missed." "Wait did you include Bless?"), mainly as an attempt to speed up the game. But I think it might help in your case, also, especially if you are concerned about honest mistakes. Getting the math correct before you drop the die would cut down on the opportunity to fudge (either purposefully or accidentally).

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

Congratulations, Jonathan.

I would go with Grabbing Style or Crane Style.

Grabbing style is one of the few ways to keep your Dex bonus to AC when you make a pin. And being able to use one hand to grapple without penalty gives you a great way to get a rope handy to tie up.

Crane Style can help keep you from getting beaten up when you grapple: when you're grappling someone, you are your target's main focus, and you will take their full attacks. (You only need a hand free for Crane Wing: you can use two hands with Crane Style.)

You can't really use Snapping Turtle Style when your grappling: since you have to have one hand free to benefit from Snapping Turtle Style, as soon as you use two hands to grapple, it won't do you any good.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crimeo wrote:

Scar hex isn't a spell, so that rules text does not apply. Which you seem to have noticed, but yet for some reason ignored?

There need be either something that establishes this for (Su) abilities, or for "all attacks" or something. Otherwise by RAW it wouldn't require either line of sight or effect. I don't know if such a thing exists.

Well, the differences between ex, su, and sp abilities are called out in the glossary. Note that there is nothing about using different targeting rules: just SR, AoOs, and dispel/anti-magic fields. Most people take that to mean that these are the only differences among these types of abilities, and the already-established rules for range, targeting, etc. still apply.

If you honestly believe that the magic targeting rules don't apply to any su abilities, then you also have to assume that the definitions for "range" (personal/touch/close/medium/etc.) and "area" (cone/line/spread/burst/etc.) also do not apply. (Duration should be OK because rounds, minutes, etc. are all defined outside of the magic rules. EDIT: oh, except for "instantaneous" and "permanent" and "concentration". Never mind: you need new definitions for "duration", too.)

Crimeo wrote:

Line of Sight and Line of Effect is required.

Nothing in Scar hex removes these limitations.

What CREATED these requirements, such that they'd have to be removed?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't know where to look in the rules to follow up on this claim. Where would it establish that line of sight and effect are needed for such in general? Like in Su/Sp/Ex sections or something?

It's in the general magic rules (emphasis mine):

Line of Effect:
"A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast."

Aiming a Spell:
"Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell."

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

I see a lot of people saying that ranged options are strong because you aren't in danger from melee, but in my experience, that is usually not true.

With most scenarios I've seen from both sides of the screen, when combat starts, you are rarely more than 60 feet away. Corners, corridors, and walls limit your options even more.

This is the main reason I consider anything that increases the range modifier of a long bow to be a complete waste (likewise for a halfling sling staff, back when you could still use one). Even with a short bow, a 60 ft range increment is usually plenty.

Does disarm even work when the target actually doesn't have "hands"?

But the OP says his mount has Charge Through:

"Benefit: When making a charge, you can attempt to overrun one creature in the path of the charge as a free action. If you successfully overrun that creature, you can complete the charge. If the overrun is unsuccessful, the charge ends in the space directly in front of that creature.
Normal: You must have a clear path toward the target of your charge."

This feat explicitly allows you to overrun a target when you are charging a second target. So the particular argument about whether you can overrun as a charge is not actually applicable in this case. Why don't you start a completely different thread on that question and leave this one to answering the OP's actual questions?

To the OP:
I don't see anything in the rules about overrunning multiple targets (like there is in the Bull Rush rules). I don't think you can do it.

Regarding #3:
I don't believe you get to make an attack while your mount is using Charge Through, because your round is already dedicated to the charge. Now, if your mount picks up Greater Overrun, you could take an AoO if the target falls prone.

#4 is a bit tricky:
It says "when you make an overrun attempt while mounted", not "when your mount makes an overrun attempt". The problem I see here is that your mount has Charge Through and you do not.

Using Charge Through, your mount would be charging target #2 and overrunning target #1. In order to use Trample, you need to be overrunning target #1 also. In that case, I would say that you could forgo your charge attack on target #2 in order to overrun overrun target #1. That would give your mount a free single attack on target #1 (from trample) while it goes on to attack target #2 at the end of its charge.

I don't think that's the best course of action for you, actually, but that's how I would rule it.

As always, ask your GM. Mounted Combat rules are very confusing, and everyone interprets them differently.

There is a raining arrow, which carries holy water. You might be able to convince your GM to create a similar item for poisons.

Check out the Elves of Golarion or the Alchmey Manual for some cool ideas on specialty arrows.

1 to 50 of 1,904 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.