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

James Risner's page

RPG Superstar 2014 Marathon Voter. Paizo Superscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 4,139 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 9 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,139 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
There is no such think as Sohei Weapon Training, only Weapon Training.

Sohei Weapon Training has Sohei restrictions.

So you couldn't be more wrong wrong wrong.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
the author wants the Sohei to be able to flurry with any weapon in which he has Weapon Training, and even those who don't think that a Sohei can do this until he has 6 Sohei levels must surely realise that he can do it when he does have 6 Sohei levels!

He can't do it until 6th level Sohei and at 6th he can only do it with weapons he has Sohei Weapon Training.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
GM Arkwright wrote:
Is there any actual ruling on whether a spell placed in a Ring of Spell Knowledge is permanent, or whether it can be swapped out for a new one?

My view: Permanent, since there are no rules for changing.

Since there are no rules either way, it is acceptable for some to view it as changeable. So ultimately, ask your GM.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
The clause only requires Weapon Training, not 'Sohei Weapon Training', nor any number of Sohei levels

But you only get the clause at 6th level which you refuse to understand.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Black_Lantern wrote:
I'm wondering how I should handle a character going around grave digging for strong skeleton corpses.

Same way any reasonable GM does. When you detect they are doing that, say "You don't find one today, tomorrow or ever. Please stop trying."

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Bandw2 wrote:

then you apply the two-weapon fighting penalties only when a weapon is ever wielded as an off-hand with your character.

then just say vestigial arms DO NOT give you an additional off-hand or primary hand, but are still considered a free-hand.

this is how I am ruling it.

I can't say I followed you nor know your conclusion.

But if your conclusion is that you can two hand a weapon and attack with unarmed strike with a humanoid with two base hands, then your conclusion didn't follow the set out logic.

You have a primary hand and a off hand. Pick how you want to use them. If you have non-claw natural weapons then you can also take those attacks. But you can't use claws extra nor can you grow an arm and take another attack (unarmed strike, armor spikes, or whatever.)

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Bob Bob Bob wrote:

... armor or a shield

If you can show me anywhere in there it actually says "shield bonus",

Doesn't need to do so. Quit trying to be so pedantic in reading the rules, that is where half the silly RAW interpretations arise.

It works on armor and shields, so you get armor bonuses and shield bonuses depending on whether it is on an armor or a shield.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
Could you two-weapon fight with a two-hander by having your "off-hand" be an unarmed strike?

You can't TWF with a 2 hander and an offhand because that is three hands.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Jiggy wrote:
be absolutely sure that they understood your question and that you understood their answer and this isn't all just a matter of miscommunication.

You wouldn't believe how often this can be an issue. I'd do this via Facebook or email and not "just before a game starts" so they have plenty of time to reply with thought.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Byrhtnoth wrote:
James, Do you know where I can find this post?

No but it was a 3 second search:

JJ Saying you good as a monk wildshaped

Found via going to JJ's post and putting in Wild Monk

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
I don't think Wild actually works for a shield.

It works for shield because it opens with working with shields.

This is just like all the magical effects language says spell but we know clearly it refers to magical effects like Sp/Su/etc that interact with spells. Most things come from spells the same as most armor comes from armor bonus. We know it works with them because the section title is spells and magical effects.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
redviiper wrote:
Nothing said it but real world dynamics... a man with a broken glass bottle will not have the same reach as say a man with a ladder.

Guess what? This game doesn't care about real world physics or dynamics. It has elves and fireball.

So unless a rule says "you gain reach with an improvised weapon" then there is absolutely no improvised reach weapon.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
But aren't the abilities altered by the fact that they're now a list of options instead of a hard ability?

Q monk is an exception to the normal archetype rules. It is the only archetype that if taken and you make no choices, it is a no-op. It won't do anything to your Monk if you don't choose to swap out something for options it provides.

So with that knowledge, the FAQ about Q monk, you know that until you swap something out you have not altered anything. Having not altered anything, you do not fall prey to the "replace or alter" rule.

Edit: Crap I didn't see this whole thing was necroed.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
no

+1

I struggle to understand why the question was asked. OP, why? Was there something that said you should get reach?

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Byrhtnoth wrote:
It was my understanding that I would have both my Wild Armor/Shield bonuses, as well as the Monk AC armor bonus while wildshaped, since I would not count as wearing armor while polymorphed for the effects of the Monk AC. Is this true?

Yes true. There is a JJ post explaining this is true and is true because the Wild armor special costs +3 and the cost is because of things like this.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
SiliconDon wrote:

And as I posted the last comment, my VC ruled that it works the way the other GM thought.

Well, s%&+. Can we please mark my post as an FAQ? This is basically going to cripple a character that I have already sunk 4 levels worth of XP into.

Classes are written with single class in mind. Your GM is misreading the BAB rule in FoM. You add your BAB from other classes.

If you can't convince your GM this is true, you need to rebuild your character. Because you are not likely to see a reply to this as a FAQ. It isn't a heavily debated issue (there are not many that think like your GM) and FAQ are not answered quickly.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Black_Lantern wrote:
level 5 cleric ... a high-CR, 18 HD creature under his controls such as the Ice Linnorm?

Why did you give him a corpse?

If he killed the CR 18 in his party, then let him. If you dropped a corpse on him, it is the GM's fault.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
redviiper wrote:
Ok thanks... wasn't sure since one added options.

I don't really understand, but you are not alone. There are a lot of people who don't immediately think that adding options is replacing or altering.

Removing, adding, replacing, and pretty much anything else that mentions the class feature will block two archetypes from working together.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:
Okay, so the reason for my question is I am thinking about making a Witch with the Fate patron and taking Harrower Prestige class, but I don't want to lose out on the higher level patron spells. SO when do they actually get added to the list? Is it only when they are added to spells known, or does a level 1 Fate witch have Wish on her spell list, even if she's not high enough level to cast it?

Prestige classes don't add Bloodline or Patron spells to your list.

So if you don't take Witch levels you don't get Patron spells.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Sniggevert wrote:

First question, no it would not provoke, as they are considered actual light weapons for game mechanics.

Second, you are correct it would default to the same actions as a normal weapon. Free to drop or move to sheathe/put away/draw.

+1

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Pupsocket wrote:
But by a strict RAW reading, I am right and you are wrong, and let me walk you through it.

That mentality is a problem. It is also something that only happens in a vacuum of online space. It leads to people coming to a game with an expectation of awkward interpretations that as you say "no GM will allow" and when the GM doesn't allow it they feel the GM is being a jerk.

Paizo view (as has been explained multiple times) is that if you are reading the text to get some "too good to be true" meaning then you are reading it wrong.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Krodjin wrote:
Calth wrote:
Right, I was just saying that a Sohei 6/Fighter 5 has the equivalent of weapon training 2.
I think that's right. But you may find GM's who won't let you flurry with any weapon group that isn't called out specifically in the Sohei description of weapon training...

+1

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Pupsocket wrote:

Selling off proficiency bonus feats was a well-known 3.5 hack.

proficiencies you sell of with archetypes come back as bonus feats

We play vastly different games by very different readings of the rules.

I don't agree you could do that in 3.5, in PF, and I also don't agree you can sell them off and they come back.

I get that you think these are facts based on the text, I just have a different interpretation of the text that doesn't come to the same conclusions as you.

Chengar Qordath wrote:
messy attempts to address the issue without actually changing the written text

Mostly it comes down to "you are reading that text wrong, let me help you out it means this ..."

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber
AlphaSteve wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Fighters have those feats. But some people wanted to try to swap those out for chosen feats and the Fighter class doesn't allow that.
Except the FAQ clearly states that Fighters don't have those feats.

You are keying in on one aspect of that FAQ without understanding the question they are answering.

The absurd question is basically "Hey I get all these extra feats, and I get a class ability to swap feats for other feats. I want to Swap my Armor (Heavy) feat for Weapon Spec Longsword!."

The answer they are giving is "no you can't" without articulating it more succinctly. They should have worded it like this "you get the feats but only feats you select from a list of combat feats can be swapped out."

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber

His whole thread here is pure fallacy.

I'm not entirely certain he believes what he is saying, because he can't articulate how if what he says is true then why can't a 1st level Alchemist apply poisons at immediate speed, ninja 2/monk 1 get Ki for +4 Dodge AC, and assorted other deals where we allegedly get to snip out a partial paragraph of some future ability (like say at 20th level) and get to use it at 1st because of imagined rules based on a fallacy.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber

There is a post by SKR somewhere on Cha to Init instead of Dex that seemed to indicate you got the Circlet of Perception bonus to Init in that case. I'll admit I couldn't quite tell because it was something similar to "it is a check you add your charisma to right?"

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber

The rules are fairly clear. I think the problem is 3.5 had Monkey Grip and people remember/want that back.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber

Fighters have those feats. But some people wanted to try to swap those out for chosen feats and the Fighter class doesn't allow that.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Nostratus wrote:
When you cast sunburst against monsters with the same spell resistance, you make a check for each monster or once for all monsters ?

I don't think it is clearly articulated whether you roll once and apply toward all the valid SR checks or you roll again for each SR check in a given area spell.

So ask your GM.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Jeraa wrote:
I never bothered to check, but it is in the FAQ.

Fair enough.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Aelryinth wrote:
it's already been ruled that Fabricate can make masterwork items and totally bypass the Crafting process.

Link, as that is in debate.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Archaeik wrote:
Can a Monk 1/Ninja 2 spend a ki point to give himself a +4 dodge bonus for 1 round?

According to Malcheate, yes.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Blakmane wrote:
Is anyone actually agreeing with malachi here? I couldn't see anyone else..

I don't know why we are bothering to respond to him. Well, unless we are all insane.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Does absorb equipment weigh anything? Can a Druid double as a bag of holding?

Without a rule that it is now weightless, you are still identically encumbered.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
LazarX wrote:
No one has managed to jailbreak the Apple TV3 yet, and it's just about at the end of it's product life.

Airplay does what the majority of people wanted to do with an ATV. So is there even much demand for a jailbroken one now? I no longer need mine JB.

HangarFlying wrote:
I'm going to need the context for which this FAQ was written because as it stands, the question, itself, confuses me.

I'm fairly certain the context is "if you add a spell known and it doesn't say to add it to your class spell list, then the spell chosen must be a spell already on your class spell list."

Kind of like 3.5's Feat Extra Spell. It just said "add a spell known" and for a while until they FAQ it, people took that to mean Wizards can add Heal to their spell known and cast Arcane Heals.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
I have addressed ad nauseum, and then say the reason I haven't addressed it is because if I do then my argument will fall down like a house of cards.

You absolutely haven't addressed it.

All you have done is say "I'm right and I got no valid proof".

Because all the proof you have used proves you wrong.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber

Last message was a cut and paste failure.

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
stuff that is wrong and I, Malachi, can't admit it for some reason

You can't show any proof it works the way you say in the wake of plenty of evidence and FAQ to the contrary. Yet you keep asserting you are right. At this point I guess you are doing it to just stir up everyone?

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Jeraa wrote:
Its only debatable if you don't know what "high degree of craftsmanship" means.

This is RAW.

It is only debatable when different people have different interpretations for the words.

You can't just assert you are right and the other side has no ground.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Jeraa wrote:
Quote:


You must make an appropriate Craft check to fabricate articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship.
That sounds like a masterwork item to me.

It sounds like "make a crude chair" as opposed to "make a pile of rocks out of sand".

You not notice I said debated? There is no generally agreed upon side.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
maouse wrote:
Fabricate + Raw materials = easy markups for master crafted items... even at 50% (sale price).

Debated, whether or not you can make masterwork things as opposed to rough examples.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Jeraa wrote:
Assuming you are meaning 3.X D&D, that is incorrect.

I think he means one that was released today.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
J Scot Shady wrote:
The intention of asking this question was two see if I could use this combo from first level with some kind of penalty, until I could take the feat at 3rd level.

The Thunder and fang feat lets you do something you can't do without it.

Specifically using a Klar and an Earthbreaker in the same attack routine.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber

Ok, addition error.

I'm sold.

They are all separate abilities.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Ipslore the Red wrote:
Absolutely incorrect. The Hedge Magician trait allows you to make a profit, and Ravingdork's magic capital-focused build gives a 1:10 return.

Both are corner cases or potentially open to rules debates.

Rules debate:

Raving Dork's Magical capital is used to make items but the rules say it is:
Magic: Magic represents magical power at your disposal. Some activities, such as healing sick peasants in the slums or constructing a magical library, specifically require yo to spend Magic.

Some could say healing or books on magic are not making items.

Additional Resources wrote:

Traits: all traits are legal except for the following: Hedge Magician

Quests & Campaigns: Feats: Expert Trainer is legal

Neither are legal in PFS, which is where they tend to only allow reasonable rules with reasonable adherence to the "spirit of the game".

So my statement depends on the intended design of the rules and the general concept that there should be no way to profit from making items directly. Even the business rules in Ultimate Campaign only allow you to make monthly profit. They don't allow for "per item" profit.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Weirdo wrote:

relavant FAQ

Note that bloodline powers, bloodline arcana, bonus spells, and bloodline feats are three separate abilities of the sorcerer class; the robes only affect the bloodline powers.

Good find. But it lists 4 things in a 3 thing list. So which two of the four are one ability? Powers and Feats? Arcana and spells?

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
ElyasRavenwood wrote:
I'm just curious. Why do people need official rulings? ... the GM's job to adjudicate

If more GM's were diplomatic, there wouldn't be a need. Many RAW situations arise from people having different interpretations of the RAW.

If GM's would say "You know you are right, the rule works the way you think. But I'm going to rule 0 it my way" then we wouldn't need official clarifications.

For PFS games on the other hand, you can't Rule 0 things.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
I know the rules better than most people and I was not among the first to pick up on it. I just did not think to put that combo together.

+1

andreww wrote:
Both however were spotted within days of Paragon Surge being released

You forget there is a mindset of people like us. People who look for corner cases. I've got around 60 local PFS players and only 3 (myself included) make complex builds like these.

It isn't as obvious to everyone these types of interpretations. So just because they were not detected doesn't mean they are not trying to find them.

Example: Apple has a whole team of people looking for exploits in the OS and fixing them asap. They try very hard to be the most secure OS and they don't allow rooting (jailbreaking in Apple community terms.) Yet every iOS gets jailbroken. Not for lack of diligent trying on the part of Apple staff.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
I can't accuse you of lying

I'm quickly losing patience with you.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
J Scot Shady wrote:
Basically, I'm working on a character for PFS that eventually gets Thunder & Fang feat but I was interested in seeing how the stlye would work without the feat. Thanks again.

Keep in mind there is heated debate on this feat and how it works.

You absolutely will run into table variance. There will be tables that run the rules as written that require you to use the klar with the earthbreaker in the other hand. That you can't use a Large earthbreaker two handed and you can't use two earhtbreakers.

There are some that say that isn't RAW, but there isn't one true RAW since the whole idea of RAW is rules as written which always requires interpretation.

My advice: Don't play characters in PFS with table variance that effectively gimp your character when sitting at a table with an unfavorable interpretation of critical rules of your character. It isn't fun. I've done it with an Overrun druid.

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
edit: I think the intent was to add a spell that was already on your class list, not any spell from any class so it should not affect the sorcerer or oracle in a negative manner.

You can't show any proof it works the way you say in the wake of plenty of evidence and FAQ to the contrary. Yet you keep asserting you are right. At this point I guess you are doing it to just stir up everyone?

Osirion

Paizo Superscriber
Kaboogy wrote:
If I find a magic item, I can sell it for half price. What about crafting a magic item? Do I sell it for half price or full? If I sell it for full price, when does it turn after a half price sell? After I wear it? Never?

Sell everything at half.

The rules prohibit making a profit making items.

1 to 50 of 4,139 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.