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

Jiggy's page

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32. RPG Superstar 2013 Marathon Voter, 2014 Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 16,733 posts (17,967 including aliases). 15 reviews. 3 lists. 1 wishlist. 12 Pathfinder Society characters. 14 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 16,733 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
Rum.
Lamontius wrote:

threw that little set of nonsense right out the window

Best not do that anymore. That is how you get hobos congregating outside your window.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

David_Bross wrote:
Objectively cape of feinting was terrible and needed to be banned.

Spoiler'd for derail:
No, objectively it offered the possibility of a stun lock. Subjectively, a stun lock is something that is "terrible and needs to be banned".

I speculate that this community would be a far better place (and have far nicer debates) if gamers would accept that difference and own their opinions.

But that's just my subjective opinion on the matter. ;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If it was a spell effect (even an all-day ongoing effect), no one would bat an eye. Feats are allowed to shift from "reality" to "fantasy" too.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I don't think you know what "objectively" means.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Artanthos wrote:
thenovalord wrote:
Diplomacy isn't that mighty. Takes a minute of chat + will not work against those that mean you harm. Having a high score is worthwhile but is no good for combat, hostilities and under time pressure

Using diplomacy on someone who is hostile has a DC of 25.

Making a request is a 1 round action: this would include requesting the chance to talk.

Diplomacy wrote:
If a creature's attitude toward you is at least indifferent, you can make requests of the creature.

No requests for hostiles; gotta make them at least indifferent first. And that requires 1+ minutes of interaction.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I can't think of any precedent for the use of an item counting as casting the spell, whereas for NOT counting as casting the spell we have the FAQ you mentioned.

Looks to me like, unless it gets changed, items work fine.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Unity Gain wrote:
One last thought, too. You could beat the in-game time constraint by having multiple light spells simultaneously.
Light wrote:
You can only have one light spell active at any one time. If you cast this spell while another casting is still in effect, the previous casting is dispelled.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mythic Power Attack wrote:
In addition, the bonus damage from this feat is doubled on a critical hit, before it's multiplied by the weapon's critical multiplier.

Power Attack was always multiplied on a critical hit. Mythic also doubles it on a crit before you do that multiplication.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Thanks, that's what I thought.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Answers, as best I know/can find:

1)It says in the scenario(I read it afterward) that the spiders have 22 HP, but when we fought them it seemed they had near 40.
If memory serves from when I ran this, I think at that subtier they're just standard giant spiders, which (looking at the PRD) puts them at 16HP. Or maybe they had the Advanced template for an extra 6HP. Could be wrong, though.

2)Is it possible to be triple or quadruple webbed and have the effects stack?

Web wrote:

Web (Ex) Creatures with the web ability can use webs to support themselves and up to one additional creature of the same size. In addition, such creatures can throw a web up to eight times per day. This is similar to an attack with a net but has a maximum range of 50 feet, with a range increment of 10 feet, and is effective against targets up to one size category larger than the web spinner. An entangled creature can escape with a successful Escape Artist check or burst the web with a Strength check. Both are standard actions with a DC equal to 10 + 1/2 creature's HD + creature's Con modifier. Attempts to burst a web by those caught in it suffer a –4 penalty.

Web spinners can create sheets of sticky webbing up to three times their size. They usually position these sheets to snare flying creatures but can also try to trap prey on the ground. Approaching creatures must succeed on a DC 20 Perception check to notice a web; otherwise they stumble into it and become trapped as though by a successful web attack. Attempts to escape or burst the webbing gain a +5 bonus if the trapped creature has something to walk on or grab while pulling free. Each 5-foot-square section of web has a number of hit points equal to the Hit Dice of the creature that created it and DR 5/—.

A creature can move across its own web at its climb speed and can pinpoint the location of any creature touching its web.

I'm not sure what you mean by "have the effects stack". You can't be quadruply-entangled, but it's possible you'd need a separate escape attempt from each web before finally being completely free. I'm not sure.

3)We didn't have any large minis so the the GM made them medium but didn't make the stat changes
Unless there's an adjustment in the scenario that I don't remember, they're already statted out as medium. In any case, not having the right size mini does not mean you get to change the monsters. If nothing else, a medium mini can be placed in the intersection of four spaces to indicate a large creature. But the GM is never supposed to modify the monsters.

4)Since the Web attack is a ranged attack, does it provoke if in threatened squares?
I don't see why not.

5)We had a 4th lvl paladin with great Fort saves, no one at the table could remember him failing a Fort save(myself and him included) against the poison, but the GM insisted he had.
I can't really comment on that.

6)It doesn't list the webs having DR or anything but it was played that they did, and the webs already in the environment and especially the one they shot for free at the ladder were basically indestructible, this seems odd to me.
Webs do have DR; see above. It's always DR 5/–, though.

7)The explosive crated never went boom, and burning hands was cast...a looot, and wouldn't the burning hands, if cast through a PC's square who was webbed(with that players permission) hit ever instance of the web seperately as an AoE spell? Like if a character was Quadruple webbed the burning hand would damage each of the 4 webs not just one?
Doesn't look like the webs have any special rules about fire, so you'd just treat them like any other object (so half damage from energy, unless the GM deemed them "vulnerable"). Don't remember how the crates work.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Ferious Thune wrote:
Is that broken or abusive? I don't know. I do think it's good they limited the classes with access to it. My reach Cleric would definitely like the ability to get three buff spells off in a round: Swift action drink a potion of Long Arm using Accelerated Drinker (walk around with it in hand)

Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I believe AccDr makes drinking a potion of move action, not a swift action.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's funny just how often "list of broken things" threads turn out to mostly be "list of things whose mechanics I don't understand" threads. :)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

What would be a non-abusive use of contingent action/contingent scroll?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
My point is not that every class must be mechanically similar (that's a terrible idea), my point is that they should be on-par power level wise

Or to perhaps put it another way:

How scared the party is of the BBEG should depend more on their estimation of his level than on what class he is. The WAYS in which the party prepares for combat should be different based on what class he is (i.e., prepare displacement against a fighter, dispel magic against a caster, etc), but HOW MUCH of a threat he is should NOT be a function of which class he is. The party should be equally scared of a 20th level fighter as a 20th level wizard, even if they'll approach the two with different strategies. But currently, that's not the case.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Triphoppenskip wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
How does the Fighter being better out-of-combat or the Rogue in-combat hurt your playstyle, though? If a class's design prohibits certain playstyles while other classes don't...that class is a worse-designed class and should be fixed.

But isn't that kind of the purpose of different classes. Everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses thus the reason a party is formed. To me the way you're suggesting makes everyone seem kinda generic but maybe I missed your point.

I think you did miss his point. I think that every single person who wants different classes to have their own strengths and weaknesses and thus require a party.

In fact, that's WHY people have issues with some of Pathfinder's elements: because currently, it's NOT the case that "everyone's got strengths and weaknesses". Rather, you've got Class X that has such-and-such a strength and also these other weaknesses, but then Class Y has that same strength only better, and then also has fewer weaknesses and additional strengths.

So if the ideal is something like "Everybody is strong in one or two areas, weak in another one or two areas, and moderately competent in the rest," then the argument from folks like the above is "Let's please get there, instead of having some classes that have strengths but no weaknesses while others have weaknesses but no strengths".

And somehow, lots of people (not just you) see that call for every class to have a unique assortment of both strengths and weaknesses and think, "Wait, you mean you want everyone to be the same?"

I'm still trying to figure out how that conclusion is drawn.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Not sure how that relates to the questions I was being asked, but sure.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
You need to be trained in Knowledge: Metagame and have the Forum Regular feat.

Knowledge (metagame): 1d20 + 13 ⇒ (12) + 13 = 25

Oh hey, VOTOZ is online!

Congrats, TOZ!

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Woo! Congrats, PFCBG!

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Neilson wrote:
I would say "Who would be foolish enough to drink strange fluids" but this is the Pathfinder Society.
Kingdom of Loathing wrote:
You think back to what your mother told you about strange liquids found in caves. You're pretty sure she said, "Drink it! What's the worst that could happen?"

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Holybushman wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

Disclaimer : it's been years since I played a PFS game.

For all those who say "play Core only / Ban the [insert splat here] / etc", that isn't an option in PFS. Neither the GM nor any of the players can disallow any of the official PFS-endorsed material.

Ah...being that I am not familiar with PFS regulations I was unsure of this aspect. Thank you for clearing it up.

On the bright side, the PFS campaign focuses on levels 1-11, and most common complaints about the system (at least, that I've seen) tend to only show up (or be at their worst) at higher levels.

For instance, I recently played a scenario alongside an 11th-level rogue, and although the difference between him and the other PCs could be felt, it wasn't too bad and he could still contribute.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

When interpreting rules, I like to keep this motto in mind: "A character with Ability X should have an advantage over characters without it".

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

DrDeth wrote:
But I ask then- there are plenty of great FRPG without Vancian or without alignments or that are classless, etc. Why not play one of those? Why the NEED to change Pathfinder to meet your particular wants?

Can't speak for everyone, but maybe even the drastic changes are (at least in the eyes of those clamoring for them) still smaller than going to a whole different game? I mean, theoretically, if someone wanted to change anything up to 49% of the Pathfinder system, then it's still "easier" (in at least some sense of the word) to change Pathfinder than to switch to a different game.

Or at least, that's my speculation.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

John Francis wrote:
Following arguments through the twisted path of the CRB seems to have a pretty high DC, even with training!

Indeed; I actually flipped back and forth between a couple of different pages on the PRD before I finally found that rule. Knew it was in there somewhere, but...

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

6 people marked this as a favorite.

This thread is a good illustration of why you should take the time to tell your friends/family/etc what you love about them instead of only discussing the things they need to do better. If someone can see discussions of how to improve a game and think it means it's unloved, how much more an actual person?

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

David Bowles wrote:

Why is there a "no" under the skill table for untrained knowledge skills, then?

Because the table only has room for a quick snapshot rather than the full rules? That's why we have both: you can skim the table to get a quick idea of which skills are worth paying attention to without ranks and which ones aren't, and then you can look at the actual rules text to learn more fully how things actually work.

Check out the Handle Animal skill for another example.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

John Francis wrote:


I really don't see what there is to misunderstand.

What is the "Untrained" section talking about, if it isn't referring to situations where you are allowed to make the knowledge check untrained?

It defines what "Trained Only" means, rather than being an additional limitation on top of "Trained Only".

As per the rule I quoted, the only time a skill can't be attempted at all untrained is if it's listed as "Trained Only" and does NOT have an "Untrained" listing. Knowledge skills do not match these criteria, and are therefore able to be made untrained by ANY character as long as the specifications listed in the "Untrained" entry are met.

Bardic Knowledge, then, must be allowing something beyond that.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Or maybe you've misinterpreted the relationship between the "Trained Only" heading at the top of the skill and the "Untrained" entry in the skill description.

Skills wrote:
Untrained: This entry indicates what a character without at least 1 rank in the skill can do with it. If this entry doesn't appear, it means that the skill functions normally for untrained characters (if it can be used untrained) or that an untrained character can't attempt checks with this skill (for skills that are designated “Trained Only”).

As you can see, a skill being designated "Trained Only" does NOT completely prohibit its untrained use unless it ALSO lacks an "Untrained" entry in its description. If such an entry IS present, then said entry defines what exactly "Trained Only" means for that particular skill.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

John Francis wrote:

Bardic Knowledge allows all knowledge checks to be made untrained (thus overcoming the "Trained Only" requirement normally associated with Knowledge skill checks), but it does not override the limitation explicit in the rules

CRB p100, KNOWLEDGE (Int : Trained Only) wrote:
Untrained: You cannot make an untrained Knowledge check with a DC higher than 10.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying that the Bardic Knowledge ability to make a Knowledge check untrained literally does nothing.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lamontius wrote:

I like pathfinder and the a lot of the people who make pathfinder

I dislike most of the forum posting by a lot of you
a lot of it makes my enjoyment of my hobby more difficult

...and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.

Wait, sorry, that was something else.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zark wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Just because I ask for fewer olives doesn't mean I don't like pizza.
I like pizza and olives, but usually not at the same time, but if other want pizza with olives they should be able to get it.

Hey, get your own metaphor!

;)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just because I ask for fewer olives doesn't mean I don't like pizza.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Kyle Baird wrote:


Top 20 Scenarios (min 10 reviews)

4.50 4-08 Cultist's Kiss

4.30 3-21 The Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment

4.24 4-09 The Blakros Matrimony

Hm, haven't played those yet; looks like I'd better get on it.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Mark,

Now that psychic magic is known to be on the horizon, I've got a question for you.
Now that early psychic magic is available to the design team, the answer to your unasked question is "Yes". Note that since the magic I just used hasn't been playtested yet, it may not produce the correct answer.

Pretty much what I figured you'd say.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mark,
Now that psychic magic is known to be on the horizon, I've got a question for you.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Okay, technically still 11.2, but...

As of GenCon 2014 a couple of weeks ago, the two-year story of how Thomas the Tiefling Hero saves the world has ended. He fought the demonic hordes at [REDACTED] when the [REDACTED] failed; he persuaded political leaders to support the mustering of an army; he secured and activated a mighty weapon against demons; he rescued Cyphermages from Rahadoum and elven demon hunters from the Tanglebriar, as well as earning the friendship of a tribe of mammoth riders, securing their support in an assault on the Worldwound; he tracked down and killed/captured two treacherous villains; he opened the door to Jormurdun and helped repel the dark forces lurking within; and he even slew a demon lord.

Now, with the threat of widespread demonic incursion past, he's retiring from active duty as a Pathfinder field agent. Now, he'll be spending his time working as an understudy with Ollysta Zadrian of the Silver Crusade (perhaps one day he'll be her successor?) and going on private missions to protect the innocent, whether at the behest of the church of Iomedae or on his own initiative.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Huh.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
[neat stories]

Welcome to PFS! Just to point out (in case you didn't know), Bonekeep is not a normal PFS scenario. It's designed to be just a super-hard combat gauntlet. Your other experiences will have been much closer to the norm. :)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Hangman Henry IX wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Hangman Henry IX wrote:
a mission for the LG "holy warrior" arm of pfs that had players go and take part in a slave auction. they were told the optimal outcome would be that the slaves would be bought and no trouble would be had. for many people, this could have been their first taste of pfs. a slave auction.

Did you actually play that mission? I did, and it was NOT the "go buy some slaves" idea that you paint it as. It was "Go rescue these victims who are about to be sold into slavery, and do so without causing a riot or a bloodbath or anything because that's not good either". The whole idea was that the slaves were victims and the PCs were supposed to rescue them without murderhobo-ing the whole place.

Maybe do some fact-checking next time, eh?

the problem is that the first solution is to take part in the auction. they could have given you an item to create an illusion that you are meant to switch out with the slaves while in transit, or sleep gas, or any sort of magical deus ex. the first line of the mission after questions is in fact: "after the PCs agree to attend the auction and bid for the enslaved..." with no hint for the gm on what to do if the players want to avoid going to a slave auction.

If you honestly can't see the difference between "attend=use the most discreet method possible to liberate the oppressed" and "attend=take part in/give compliant approval to", then I don't know what to tell you. Physical presence is not automatically bad; that's like saying the Mendevian crusaders are evil because they agreed to commit acts of violence among demons in the Worldwound. Saying that helping innocent victims is icky just because it uses the phrase "attend the auction" is beyond ridiculous.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hangman Henry IX wrote:
a mission for the LG "holy warrior" arm of pfs that had players go and take part in a slave auction. they were told the optimal outcome would be that the slaves would be bought and no trouble would be had. for many people, this could have been their first taste of pfs. a slave auction.

Did you actually play that mission? I did, and it was NOT the "go buy some slaves" idea that you paint it as. It was "Go rescue these victims who are about to be sold into slavery, and do so without causing a riot or a bloodbath or anything because that's not good either". The whole idea was that the slaves were victims and the PCs were supposed to rescue them without murderhobo-ing the whole place.

Maybe do some fact-checking next time, eh?

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hangman Henry IX wrote:
Is the point of the society to introduce people to pathfinder in hopes they will break off into groups and do adventure paths?

Being a "gateway" is one role of the campaign, but not the only role of the campaign. It's still a campaign of its own, whether people break off into other groups or not. But it is (as I understand it) supposed to introduce people to the game (among other things).

Quote:
Is the target audience gamers in general? Or optimizers?

Gamers in general, but it's also got some (limited) "hard-mode" options for the optimizers.

Quote:
Is the point of society play to make it so people can travel to different parts of the country and always have a game available?

Portability is one of the points, yes.

Quote:
Are we meant to be welcoming to new players? Or adversarial?

Welcoming.

Quote:
Is there meant to be a story and roleplaying? Or just a series of combats and then random useless treasure?

If you think that combat and roleplaying are two entirely different and separate things and there's only room for one or the other, then you're not very good at roleplaying. Some of my favorite roleplay moments have been in the context of combat.

Quote:
I ask this because I see a lot of gms on here who spend more time saying no to ideas than yes.

This could be a good or bad thing, depending on what's being said "no" to. There's definitely some "no" that has to happen to keep the campaign in such a state as to allow someone to (for instance) come home from active duty and expect the character they built in Iraq or wherever to function the same in Detroit. On the other hand, there's also a lot of "no" that happens when a GM wants the players to experience the scenario in a certain way. Look for keywords like "trivialize" or "challenge".

Quote:
I also ask because I continue seeing scenarios where the only roleplaying happens when I decide to make the monsters speak languages they don't know and talk to the murder hobos that are tramping about.

If you think that fighting a monster instead of parlaying with an NPC means that roleplaying hasn't happened, then you have a small idea of what roleplaying means. And I say this as someone who has on MANY occasions prevented combat via diplomacy (not necessarily the skill, sometimes just talking instead of ambushing).

I just retired my favorite character, finishing the two-year story of how Thomas the Tiefling Hero saves the world. It involved many instances of talking and winning people over—including his own teammates—but also involved many instances of violence. Sometimes he'd stand empty-handed before a troop of archers with bows drawn, calmly assuring them of his peaceful intent; other times, he'd march forward and decapitate the demon lord without a word.

And it was ALL part of playing that role.

Quote:
"Assault on the wound" goes so far as to reduce the party to I just their charisma bonuses for the first two thirds of the adventure, and then follows it up with a nonsense dungeon with a bizarre bbeg with bizarre tactics.

I agree that scenario has some issues, but the fact that it involved the violent culmination of several scenarios of exploration and diplomacy as part of a season-long narrative doesn't exactly indicate a lack of roleplay.

Quote:
Why are there so many adventures where the only talking is during the box text at the beginning?

Because you don't engage in/encourage in-combat roleplaying, perhaps?

Quote:
Is pfs meant to just be an organized open play tactical combat game? It often seems as if it is.

Only if you treat it that way.

Quote:
Why is it acceptable for there to be "killer gms" in society? Is the management really ok with people openly trying to be mean to strangers? Are they not worried this reflects bad on the game itself? Are they unaware there is social stigma of the game?

They're aware, but (so far) GMs are not fitted with shock collars for campaign leadership to be able to zap people around the world. Unfortunately, many people's response to toxic GMing is to simply leave ("vote with your feet", "they'll soon find themselves without players", etc), which unfortunately doesn't work in PFS because there are so many fresh players available. They'll just get batches of fresh players and think they're awesome GMs because look how my table is always full! We should work to remove the stigma of talking to GMs directly or even *gasp!* reporting GMs' behavior to the higher-ups. A problem can't be fixed if you just walk away from it; it's just left there for someone else to suffer from.

Quote:

Are they unaware that people of color and women have had bad experiences with being marginalized in games for sake of "authenticity"? Why is slavery acceptable in golarion? At gencon I was in a sea of priveleged white males, with few minorities and women around. In one of the missions people were sent to a slave auction, and I heard this being run at tables around me, people joking and laughing about slaves. Is it possible the management does not see this as perhaps insensitive? Do they perhaps not see slavery as actually evil?

We pretend dragons and liches are real, but we...

And this is all more of a Campaign Setting topic than a PFS topic.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I'm seeing lots of people wanting Numerian Weapon Training. I have that one. Anyone willing to trade a race boon for it?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lots of domains, bloodlines, and arcane schools give spell-like abilities too (many of them not based on spells, though).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Even the base slayer has an ability - at 1st level - that references sneak attack and therefore doesn't function until a couple levels later.

Unless you already multiclassed with rogue, that is.

It was intentional.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I want to Twist Away from a phantasmal killer that I already believe is real. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thazar wrote:
Am I the only one that thought of Dr Horribles Sing Along Blog on this one?

Nope. :)

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, we're calling for a ban on something that's only "broken" when used in single-enemy combats? I thought we all knew better than to think that the ability to wreck a single-enemy combat was a red flag.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Have:
Lingering Resonance
Numerian Weapon Training
GM star recharge
Custom Order

Want:
Interesting offers. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

There's a relatively new FAQ that changes all our prior understandings about the difference between temporary and permanent bonuses, and is relevant to this topic:

FAQ wrote:


Temporary Ability Score Increases vs. Permanent Ability Score Increases: Why do temporary bonuses only apply to some things?

Temporary ability bonuses should apply to anything relating to that ability score, just as permanent ability score bonuses do. The section in the glossary was very tight on space and it was not possible to list every single ability score-related game effect that an ability score bones would affect.

The purpose of the temporary ability score ruling is to make it so you don't have to rebuild your character every time you get a bull's strength or similar spell; it just summarizes the most common game effects relative to that ability score.

For example, most of the time when you get bull's strength, you're using it for combat, so the glossary mentions Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, Strength-based weapon damage rolls, CMB, and CMD. It doesn't call out melee attack rolls that use Dex instead of Str (such as when using Weapon Finesse) or situations where your applied Str bonus should be halved or multiplied (such as whith off-hand or two-handed weapons). You're usually not using the spell for a 1 min./level increase in your carrying capacity, so that isn't mentioned there, but the bonus should still apply to that, as well as to Strength checks to break down doors.

Think of it in the same way that a simple template has "quick rules" and "rebuild rules;" they're supposed to create monsters which are roughly equivalent in terms of stats, but the quick rules are a short cut that misses some details compared to using the rebuild rules. Likewise, the temporary ability score rule is intended as a short cut to speed up gameplay, not as the most precise way of applying the bonus.

A temporary ability score bonus should affect all of the same stats and rolls that a permanent ability score bonus does.

LINK

As you can see, the current stance is that a temporary and a permanent bonus function identically. I'm not so sure this was always the intent, but it's pretty clear that it is now, despite how so many of us were used to playing. There's not really another way to interpret "just as permanent ability score bonuses" than that they're identical.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

UndeadMitch wrote:
That's the one! That was pretty brutal, did you get caught up in it?

Diverted via 150 with everyone else. SO GLAD that I didn't have to pee or anything for two hours...

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

UndeadMitch wrote:


Having a ten hour drive stretch into over twelve hours because of a 5-10 mile detour that took about 1-2 hours on the way back west.

Oh, the I-74 spill?

1 to 50 of 16,733 << 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.