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

Kazaan's page

3,464 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,464 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The original intent of the writer for the Titan Mauler archetype was to have characters wielding Huge, Garg, and Col weapons. But the balance team decided that was excessive and deliberately changed the wording so that it doesn't exempt the character from the size-step change inherent to wielding wrong-sized weapons. It wasn't a "blunder", it was a deliberate change to address a perceived balance issue.

Also, don't trust Thax; he has a history of presenting disinformation specifically on the subject of wrong-sized weapons. The correct interpretation of the rules is as follows:

All weapons have an "effort-to-use" category and a "size" category. The effort to use is whether it is a light, 1-h, or 2-h weapon and the size is the size of creature it was designed for. So a Medium Two-Handed weapon is a weapon that requires Two-Handed effort by a Medium creature (or one that counts as Medium for wielding, ie. Centaur) while a Large One-Handed weapon is a weapon that requires One-Handed effort by a Large creature. If you wield a weapon for a different-sized creature, you shift the effective "effort-to-use" category by one step per size category difference. For instance, a Huge Light weapon wielded by a Medium character is treated as Light>1-H>2-H, a Two-Handed weapon and also suffers -2 attack per category change (net -4 for this example). It works the other way, as well; a Medium Greatsword wielded by a Huge character is treated as 2-H>1-H>Light>, a Light weapon, also with a net -4 to attack. If this change would take you "above" 2-H or "below" Light, you cannot wield the weapon. If a feat or ability changes the "effort-to-use" category and doesn't specifically call out that it applies only to weapons properly sized for you, then that means it affects weapons of all sizes and is then subject to category changes based on size disparity. In other words, a Huge Dagger is still a Light weapon, but a Medium character wields it "as if" it were 2-H. Thunder&Fang and Quarterstaff Master both specify you wield the Earthbreaker/Quarterstaff respectively "as one-handed weapons" meaning that a Large Earthbreaker/Quarterstaff is no longer categorized as 2-H>Unwieldable for a Medium character but, instead, is a 1-H>2-H weapon. Thax has a history of arguing against this principal of the rules and has been shown, time and time again, that he is incorrect but he insists on derailing threads on the subject; disregard anything he has to say on the matter.


If anything, I'd consider this a situation where the target of the bullrush were "holding on" to something to brace himself against the bullrush. For instance, you try to bullrush someone through a doorway, but the target is braced against the doorframe so it's harder to push him through. In this curcumstance, I'd give the target of the bullrush a circumstantial "soft" bonus to CMD against the rush that represents using the target of his grapple as an "anchor" of sorts against being pushed around. If this causes the bullrush to fail (ie. it fails but would have succeeded if not for this circumstantial bonus), you make your second bullrush roll (at -4) against the grappled character and, if you succeed, you push them both and the grapple is maintained. If you succeed on your roll outright, you break the grapple, analogous to breaking the target's grip on the doorframe. So, to illustrate:

We've got a Human and an Elf fighting an Orc. The Orc has grappled the Elf and the Human wants to use a Bullrush Charge against the Orc to break the grapple since he's too far away to move in and use aid another. We'll say the Orc has a CMD of 18 and the Elf has a CMD of 14 while the Human has a CMB of +10, for the sake of example. We'll say the circumstantial bonus for grappling the Elf gives a "soft bonus" of +4 so the Orc still has a CMD of 18, but it's treated as 22 to see if the grapple breaks in the process. Of course, for the Charge, the Human gets +2 so his actual CMB is +12 for this particular Bullrush.

If the Human rolls 5 or less, he doesn't succeed at the Bullrush so the Orc stays right where he is; the Bullrush was a failure.

If the Human rolls more than 5, but less than 10, he Bullrushes the Orc, but the Elf serves as an anchor and he must also move the Elf. He checks again against the Elf at -4 to his check to see if he can push him as well (requires 6 or higher roll). If not, he must end the bullrush so that the Orc is still adjacent to the Elf. If the Bullrush would, otherwise, push the Orc into a spot not adjacent to the Elf, it "succeeded", but is treated as if there were no open space to push the Orc into. If the Human succeeds against the Elf as well, both Orc and Elf are pushed together and the Grapple is still maintained.

If the Human rolls 10 or higher, the Grapple is broken and the Orc, alone, is pushed.


Best would probably be to take Unarmed Fighter at lvl 1 to get the base style, then MoMS at lvl 2 to get Ferocity. This starts you out with +1 BAB right off the bat. Then, a second level of MoMS will give you some other base style (ie. Janni, Crane, etc) to take advantage of the fact that MoMS can combine multiple styles, which would normally go to waste. In fact, you could even get the first two feats for two different chains so long as the one of them has easy prereqs that can be met by lvl 3.

1) Unarmed Fighter 1: BAB+1, Dodge (lvl 1), Dragon Style (fighter)
2) MoMS 1: BAB+1, Dragon Ferocity (monk)
3) MoMS 2: BAB+2, Crane Style (lvl 3), Crane Wing (monk)

This works with the following styles as the "easy" one (ones marked with an '*'require your lvl 1 feat slot) and most require ranks in certain skills.
Boar
Crane* (dodge)
Dragon
Earth Child
Janni (requires 6 skill ranks total)
Mantis (* if you take a Monk arch that gives up Stunning Fist)
Panther* (combat reflexes)
Snake (requires 4 skill ranks total)
Turtle
Tiger


The Tengu Rogue archetype Swordmaster has a Trance ability that allows him to utilize a number of "trance styles". The Crane and Dragon stances allow you to gain the benefits of Crane and Dragon style, among other bonuses, though it doesn't actually qualify you as having the feats (so you couldn't, for example, take Crane Wing or Dragon Ferocity as you technically don't have the prerequisite feats).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You need to be able to maintain the bonus for at least 24 hours for it to go from a temporary bonus (doesn't count towards prereqs) to a permanent bonus (counts towards prereqs). If you can maintain the shapechange for the full 24 hours, it can be rationalized that you are able to realize the feat and take it. But if you can't, it never becomes a permanent bonus and, effectively, it only gives a bonus to the modifier, not the actual score.


lemeres wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Important thing to note is that Knowledge skills aren't 100% trained only.

Quote:
Untrained: You cannot make an untrained Knowledge check with a DC higher than 10. If you have access to an extensive library that covers a specific skill, this limit is removed. The time to make checks using a library, however, increases to 1d4 hours. Particularly complete libraries might even grant a bonus on Knowledge checks in the fields that they cover.
So, DC 10 questions about any knowledge can be answered by anyone without an int penalty as long as they aren't under duress or distracted. This represents things that would be considered "common knowledge".
Or 'easy Jeopardy questions'.

I'll take Potent Potables for $100, Alex.


Brutal Pugilist Barbarian may be another good option.


Komoda wrote:

I am inclined not to penalize the monk for using FoB and killing the guy in one hit.

FoB works "as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat." You can't use that feat without two-weapon fighting. And it has been ruled that you can break off the attack after the first hit.

Now, if my players tried to abuse it, I would summarily abuse them. But in general I think it is within the rules.

Otherwise what are you going to do? They never pay the -2 penalty and they stop paying any penalty at level 5.

I think this one time it works if favor of the Monk. I am not willing to say he can't do what every other class can do because he is better at it.

Well, an easy houserule fix would be that, at Monk 4, you use Monk level as BAB for Standard Attack actions. This makes both Flurry and standard Attacks equitable at the first applicable disparity; Power Attack getting another -1/+2 at BAB +4. It also addresses all subsequent disparities. If you really want to be proactive, maybe at some later level, Monks use Monk level as BAB for all attacks (Charge, AoO, etc).


Pride is a classic sin in one specific Earth religion. But, besides that, what can drive the sense of being one's own master and trusting your own mind over the opinions and analysis of others better than Pride? Remember, this is just the mindset that drives your actions; the engine of the car, if you will. Lawful types are driven by a sense of duty; Discipline. They see Pride as getting in the way of what needs to be done. Chaotic types are driven by ego; Pride. They see Discipline as getting in the way of what they want to do. Good and Evil are the destination. If you're good, you take on the duty to do Good or you want to do Good. If you're evil, you take on the duty to do Evil or you want to do Evil. And it's often reciprocal; a LG person wants to do good as much as it is their Duty to do good and a CG person may have a sense of Duty to good that matches their desire to do good; they put their pride on the line. The LG who dies protecting others views himself as a martyr; I'll die to protect these people. The CG who dies protecting others, on the other hand, with his pride at stake, says, "I'm not gonna lose... if I go down, I'm taking you with me."

Neutrals, on the other hand, have no driving sense of duty nor of pride. They do what they can and are more likely to cut their losses and run if things start to turn sour. NG people run soup kitchens and become doctors and take care of war orphens. They're not big "super-hero" good guys like your LG Superman or your CG Robin Hood; they're the Good Samaritan who does good on a much smaller, but intimate and personal level. They're not focused on the Good to do at the destination but the Good that can be done right by the side of the road.


@james: FoB isn't just extra attacks. You use Monk Lvl in place of Monk BaB. If you're lvl 12, for example, your normal BaB is +9 so, presuming no other bonuses to hit, your standard attack would be at +9 to the attack roll. But for a flurry, your effective BaB is +12. If you make the first attack of your Flurry at +10 (accounting for flurry's -2), then say, "I don't like how this is turning out so I'll downstep this full-attack into a standard and take my Move action", you've effectively just cheated your way into a Standard Attack at +10 instead of the +9 you'd normally be entitled to. Furthermore, if you take feats like Power Attack, you get greater benefit for higher BaB. If you throw Power Attack into the previous example, you get +2 damage for -1 attack per 4 BaB. So your Flurry is made with +8 damage and -4 attack for a net of +6 attack and +6 on your damage while a standard attack is only made with +6 damage and -3 attack for a net of +6 attack and +4 damage. If you canceled your Flurry with Power Attack in these conditions, you're exploiting a free +2 damage on your Standard Attack.

@Wraith: That's exactly what I've been saying; for normal TWF, you haven't gained the benefit yet so you're free to downgrade to a Standard Attack. Yes, you eat the penalty and that's unfortunate, but you're still allowed to step-down. I'm saying that you're not allowed to step-down a Flurry, not because of the TWF penalty but because you're using a different BAB value which can yield an increase in your total Attack Bonus or interact with feats/abilities like Power Attack and yield unintentionally greater bonuses.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
The "Deciding Between an Attack or a Full Attack" language typically lets you abort a full attack after making a single attack for this very reason.

I'm not following.

Quote:
monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action

The deciding between rule allows you to demote Full-Attack actions and FoB is one.

So how do you reconcile using Flurry BAB to make a single attack as if it were part of a full-attack, and then stepping it down to a standard action? That's the crux of the matter; if you've gained no inherent benefit on that first attack, you are free to step it down. This is illustrated on the Manyshot FAQ which explains that using a feat or ability contingent on making a full-attack, which grants its benefit on the very first attack, you are obligated to continue with the full-attack and are "locked out" of the option to step down to a Standard Attack. FoB falls into this same principal. Normally, you can step a full-attack down to a standard attack. However, since FoB gives you a particular benefit exclusive to a full-attack (over a standard attack) right from the first attack (at least, from lvl 9 onwards), making a Flurry of Blows locks you into making a Full-Attack Action and locks you out of stepping it down to a Standard Attack. It's probably better to just say it locks you in right from lvl 1 because there are other abilities like Power Attack or Combat Expertise with bonuses depending on your BAB value.


I've always viewed Lawful as being driven by Discipline and Chaotic as being driven by Pride. Discipline, I define for this purpose, as "Doing what you ought to do, whether or not you want to." Conversely, this can also include, "Not doing what you ought not do, whether or not you want to". So a Lawful Good character would act for the good of people because that's what he ought to do; whether he likes the person or not, he'll act for Good. Pride is the converse; doing what you want to do, whether or not you ought to. A Chaotic Good character who wants to help a person will help that person regardless of whether or not it's his responsibility to do so. Conversely, he will not do something that he doesn't want to do, also regardless of duty or responsibility.

What this means is that, while a PoH feels duty-bound to do Good (and, typically, comes to like doing Good as a result), a PoF wants to do Good, not as a matter of duty but he rides his pride on it. The PoF will turn the criminal over to the authorities under the expectation that he will get a fair trial and that any punishment is meant to lean him away from Evil; that he will be given back his freedom at some point. If he goes to hand the criminal over and finds that the criminal will be locked up for life or simply executed out of hand, he'd probably feel obligated to take charge of this criminal personally and not hand him over.


Basically, what he's saying is that a Perception Check should not, de facto, include walking around the room and opening stuff. It's a "plain sight" search, in police terms. Actually walking around and manipulating stuff is a variety of move actions to get to it, move action again to interact with an object, and a move action a third time to detect hidden or otherwise unnoticeable things inside whatever is being manipulated (ie. secret compartment in the bottom of a drawer, item in a coat pocket in the wardrobe, etc). In other words, look with your eyes, not your hands; using hands is a separate action and not typically subject to a check. You open the drawer; bing bang boom done. Only if the drawer is stuck does it require a Str check. Once the drawer is open, anything obvious is in plain view and easy to spot; you don't need a perception check to see the book and pens in the drawer. But people are using Perception checks improperly; as a shortcut for roleplaying out the searching of a room.


Tetori Monk. There's no size limit for grappling.


To take it even further, if you have +16 BAB for 4 iterative attacks, you could make that with a Longsword held in one hand, a Dagger held in another, an Boot Blade using your foot, and a headbutt as an Unarmed Strike. This still doesn't trigger the TWF rules as you are sticking to your allowance of 4 iterative attacks. However, if you want to TWF to get an off-hand attack to go above those 4 attacks, you must declare, at the start of your Full-Attack, which weapon is your off-hand (so you know what kind of penalties to use and which weapon is getting half Str to damage) and you apply your penalties appropriately. If you haven't yet delivered your off-hand attack, you haven't "benefited" from TWF yet so you can still "soft cancel" at that point. For instance, say you declare your Longsword as your main-hand weapon and your Dagger as your off-hand. You deliver two attacks with your Longsword, taking -2 penalty for TWF, and see that this guy has some DR and you don't think your dagger will make much of a dent. You haven't yet made any off-hand attacks so you abort your TWF, drop your dagger as a free action, and two-hand your Longsword for your remaining 2 iterative attacks. Sure, you took an unnecessary -2 penalty on your first two attacks, but you haven't yet benefited from the extra off-hand attacks.

Compare with Multishot where, as the very first attack of a Full-Attack, you fire two arrows at once. Right away, you've benefited from the feat which obligates you to make a full-round action. You can't, then, "cancel out" as you normally could and step-down your full-attack into a standard attack. But you could do this if you declared TWF and took a penalty on your main-hand attack, but hadn't yet made your off-hand attack as you aren't locked into the full-attack action until you've made the additional attack.


WBL is a guideline; not a hard limit. You don't say, "Welp, you're all at your WBL limit so all the treasure from that dragon horde is confiscated by the IRS. Sucks to be you... moving on..." Now, characters with significantly more value than their WBL would suggest may attract more attention to themselves; for good or for ill. Piss poor adventurers, on the other hand, aren't going to be such major targets and may even be underestimated by their opposition.

Scenario A: Party that roughly matches their WBL shows up at the bandit camp gates.

Bandit Scout: Baws! Haxxorz @ teh gate!!!!111!!!
Bandit Baws: FOR NARNIA!
(1/4 of the bandits charge the party)

Scenario B: Party that's significantly below their WBL shows up at the camp.

Bandit Scout: Lolz, some noobs r here.
Bandit Baws: Roflstomp em
(small handful, of bandits come at the party)

Scenario C: Party that's significantly above their WBL shows up at the camp.

Bandit Scout: ERMAGERD!!!! 1337 SPLOITERS!!!!!111!!!11!!!!
Bandit Baws: RELEASE THE KRAKKEN!

(3/4 of the camp charges the party).


To simplify things, say it takes 1 minute to scan a room from a single vantage point (take 20). If you're going to actually go through drawers and stuff, you'll probably need to figure how many "major features" there are to check (ie. how many cabinets, dressers, desks, rugs, etc). You can check one feature per round (move to search, move to walk to it). I'd say a Wisdom ability check would be in order for this because it isn't about "spotting" things, per say, but being intuitive and wise enough to know to check the desk, check the dresser, check this and that. You know the old adage, "Sure, he can see a fly on the back of a dog at 100 paces, but can he see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?" So we'll average and say that you divide the number of "searchable features" by 20 and, for every point you net on your Wisdom roll, you were "wise enough" to search that many major features. If there are only 2 features (ie. a Desk and a Rug), and you net a 8 on your Wis roll, you searched the desk but didn't think to look under the rug. 11 or higher means you knew to search both. If there are 20 features, a net result of 8 means you searched 8 of those 20, taking 8 turns (move + open). This will make otherwise non-obvious treasure into obvious treasure. It also determines how long you take. searching 8 things over 8 turns means about 48 seconds. So just shy of a minute to physically go and open the drawers and cabinets, but you didn't think to check under the bed, the rug, behind the painting, etc. If you got a 20, it means you knew to search all 20 features in the room which takes you 2 minutes. Moreover, since this is an Ability Check rather than a Skill Check, there is no fiddling with take 10 or take 20; you're either wise enough to check certain things or you're not.


No, it isn't held in a hand. It's just "held" abstractly. You can deliver it with both claws and bite, as well as Unarmed Strikes, in succession on a Full-Attack. Which limb you use is entirely irrelevant.


AGorgen wrote:

@EvilPaladin

I don't understand how frostbite would work with everyone of my 7 attacks.. isn't it delivered by a melee touch attack? I don't have any touch attack, so I could only deliver it if I made a standard action to deliver it, or am I missing something?

It's a general rule for Touch spells that you can deliver them with either a melee touch attack as a standard action or any Unarmed Strike or Natural Attack (which can be AoOs, at the end of a Charge, attacks as part of a Full Attack, etc). Each time you punch, claw, or bite, you will deliver a Frostbite charge, so long as you have the charge available.


If you want to know how a Paladin of Freedom will act, just ask yourself, "what would this guy do"?


"Occam's Razor would seem to disagree with this statement."

I'm not seeing the phrase, "I think," in there. The fundamental fallacy here is that the system is comprised of a number of completely separate and isolated components, any of which may be independently modified to "fix" the system. This is, inherently, an untenable position as the problem is compounded by the interconnected nature of the system. Just because "Part A" isn't working right doesn't necessarily mean that "Part A" is broken; it may work just fine, but the system as a whole fails to function because Part A is not getting necessary cooperation from some hidden part. In other words, Part A not giving the expected output may very well mean that Part A is not getting the correct input. So you could "fix" Part A all year long; it won't fix your problem. You need to look at the problem from a holistic standpoint and not develop tunnel vision and presume that your problem is overt and isolated.

Furthermore, we aren't dealing with "matters of opinion" here. It's also a fallacy to try to phrase a "matter of fact" as if it were a "matter of opinion" to dodge being called out as incorrect. It isn't a valid statement to say, "It is my opinion that the square of the sides of a right triangle add up to the square of the hypotenuse," because that isn't a matter of opinion. If you were talking about how much you like cheese, that would be a matter of opinion because, between two people, one can say, "Cheese tastes good" and the other can say, "Cheese doesn't taste good" and neither one is wrong. But, between contrary matters of fact, you can't have a situation where neither is wrong; it is a logical impossibility. There is no such thing as "an opinion on what would be the best solution" because it isn't a matter of opinion. At most, one solution can possibly be "best" (and maybe not even if more than one must share the position of "better than the rest"), regardless of anyone and everyone's opinion on the matter. Our job is to simply use facts and logic to determine which solution falls where.


Occam's Razor doesn't mean that the "least complicated" option is correct. It means that, between two competing theories that are equally valid in explaining observations, you default to the one that requires the fewest extra assumptions.


Your GM doesn't deserve the position. The game doesn't "belong" to him; it belongs to all the players involved (the GM is still a player, not above any other person at the table). If the rest of your group sees what a bad GM he is, you can easily put him in his place by kicking him out of the group.


Sarrah wrote:
Can someone take 10 levels in a class with two archetypes - where both archetypes replace the Level 20 ability? (then multiclass into something else)

No, for the following reason:

You aren't waiting until you've gained lvl 20 to "suddenly" gain your lvl 20 ability. You've been training for 19 levels towards it. Even if you don't, ultimately, take that ability, you're still training "towards it" as a de facto standard of the class and archetype. If an archetype replaces your lvl 20 capstone (or even an ability at lvl 11 when you only intend to stop at lvl 10), it is changing the pattern of training for your entire class career with that end goal in mind. Not actually attaining the goal doesn't change that fundamental principal.


Ronin3058 wrote:

Bard and Lore Oracle

You substitute dex with charisma for the most relevant purposes and you get your charisma mod on all knowledge skills.
Later you can add 2 levels of paladin to get really gold saves

Nature Oracle is better. Lore Oracle only applies Cha to AC and Reflex Save; you don't sub it for CMD. It's also a Su ability so it turns off in an anti-magic field. Nature Oracle's Nature's Whispers applies Cha to AC and CMD and it's Ex so it can't be "turned off". As far as Knowledge checks go, pick up Pageant of the Peacock and you make a Bluff check (a Cha-based skill) in place of any Int skill check or Int ability check.

Also, pick up Scion of War to use Cha in place of Dex for Initiative.


Keep in mind "change" also includes "add to" and "basically the same, but a little different". For example, if an archetype adds to your selection of Bonus Feats, that is considered to be "changing" your Bonus Feats skill so you can't select another archetype that swaps your list for a different list, or adds additional feats of its own. Likewise, "narrowing down" a skill is also a change. Polearm Fighters trade Weapon Training for Polearm Training. They're basically the same, with Polearm Training just being focused on the Polearm group. But you can't select a second archetype that also swaps out Weapon training, even though Polearm training works almost the same and counts as Weapon training for feats, abilities, and items that affect Weapon training.


If you're using a non-composite bow, if you have a strength penalty (ie. 8 Str is a -1 mod, thus a Str penalty), it applies to your damage rolls. However, if you have a bonus, it does not benefit your damage roll since it isn't a composite bow.

So with a 1d8 damage, non-composite Bow, your damage is as follows:

-5 modifier: 1d8-5
-4 modifier: 1d8-4
...
-1 modifier: 1d8-1
+0 modifier: 1d8
+1 modifier: 1d8
+2 modifier: 1d8
...
+1,000,000,000 modifier: 1d8

With a Composite Bow, on the other hand, you can add your Str bonus to your attack roll. Each Composite Bow has a Str requirement which, if you have less than that value of Str mod, you suffer the penalty.

so, with a 1d8, composite Bow with a +2 Str rating:

-1 modifier: 1d8-3 (-1 for Str penalty, -2 for less than +2 Str mod requirement)
+0 modifier: 1d8-2
+1 modifier: 1d8-1
+2 modifier: 1d8+2 (starting here, no more -2)
+3 modifier: 1d8+2
+4 modifier: 1d8+2
...
+1 bajillion modifier: 1d8+2


@Raving: Of course. Ninja is Rogue, just a Rogue that has more complicated changes than a simple archetype would warrant. This is also why both Samurai and Cavaliers can choose any order; there are no "Cavalier only" or "Samurai only" orders. They have no archetypes that they can share because no Cavalier archetypes replace abilities that Samurai still have and vice versa. Anti-Paladin is also an alternate class, but Paladin archetypes, again, don't have any replacements for abilities that Anti-Paladins retain (iirc. APs have no abilities in common with Paladins; just related mechanics). This is also why, if you have levels in Rogue, for example, you cannot ever take levels in Ninja. It would be equivalent to taking 1 level in Two-Weapon Warrior fighter, and then 1 level of Brawler Fighter to be a Fighter 1/Fighter 1 using two otherwise incompatible archetypes.

So if there is an ACG class that has the same class abilities as one of their constituent class alternates, and those abilities are changed by an archetype, by the principal of mechanical parity, they are entitled to choose that archetype.


I guess I misread one of the posts; could have sworn it mentioned Bloodrager.


Zwordsman wrote:

hum right they are technically archetypes I guess.

Probably not then.

Technically, Wildblooded is an archetype. But also, technically, Bloodrager is an alternate class for both Sorcerer and Barbarian. Ninja is an alternate class for Rogue, which is why Ninja can take Rogue archetypes, albeit, limited to archetypes that trade the only set of abilities Rogues and Ninja have in common (Uncanny Dodge and IUD). So Ninja can take the Scout, Sanctified Rogue, and other Rogue archetypes that trade out no other Rogue class abilities other than UD and IUD. Therefore, if there is an archetype for either constituent class in one of the "combo classes" from ACG that only relies on changing class abilities that both the standard and alternate class have in common, you'd be able to use it. So, if Bloodrager has the Arcana and the respective class powers just as Sorcerer does (I'm not sure off-hand, I've only skimmed the ACG), then you'd be able to use the archetype. Same goes for Barbarian archetypes that only trade abilities that the Bloodrager also has.


Tiny would be the smallest Longspear a Medium creature could wield. It would take a Small creature to wield a Diminutive Longspear; and yes, it would still give reach by RAW ^-^


Thax, quit spreading disinformation. A one-handed weapon is one with an effort category of "one-handed". That could be a properly sized Longsword, it could be a Greatsword one size too small, it could be a Dagger one size too big, or it could be a Quarterstaff wielded one-handed via the Quarterstaff Master feat.


Maybe not a complete fix, but a quick patch would simply be to take the linearly scaling abilities for Martial classes (ie. Fighter weapon training, Ranger Favored Enemy bonus, etc) and quadratically scale them. For example, the Fighter, instead of getting +1 at lvls 5, 9, 13, and 17, he'd get +1 at lvl 5, +2 at lvl 9, +3 at lvl 13, and +4 at lvl 17, for a total of +10.


I've always viewed the action economy as follows:

1) You have 6 seconds in a round, in which all participants perform their allotted actions.

2) Most actions on your turn are, more or less, performed in parallel, with adjudication happening in sequence out of necessity. If you move, you're taking some amount of time to get to your destination while possibly also performing some standard action. This could be spending 5 seconds to move into position and "winding up" your attack to deliver at the end, or it could be delivering your attack first and then getting to your destination afterwards. It's fuzzy out of necessity.

3) Full-Round actions serve two purposes.
- A) Actions that preclude either movement or standard action. Standing there and attacking for the full round precludes your opportunity to move, for example.
- B) Actions that synergize movement and action for some added benefit. Charging combines a double move with an attack and grants a bonus for the combo.

4) Swift/Immediate actions take "almost no time, but a large expenditure of effort". Moving up to your speed as a Swift action is done much faster than moving up to your speed as a Move action. So it makes sense that you can fit in the opportunity to move as a Swift action in the same round that you've performed a Full-Round action.

5) Extra actions are about overlapping. You don't extend the time for your turn so how, exactly, do you fit another standard or move action in there? Because you're more efficient with your action; you're able to fold actions into themselves and multi-task to use your time more effectively. It's just the adjudication that happens in sequence; the actual actions are smooth and fluid and have overlapping elements with other actions. So you're executing your move while making your full-attack because you know how to execute your attacks and recover your stance on the run.


The First World may kind of work as a model or even a de facto plane of wood.


@Diego: Care to explain how the Staff Magus works, then?


The Tiefling alternate trait is worded, functionally, the same as the Redcap special ability; the only difference is the Redcap is a Small Fey so it references Medium weapons while the Tiefling trait references Large weapons. But the Redcap's ability, otherwise, works the same exact way and it's pre-equipped with a Medium Scythe. Ergo, the Tiefling can wield a Large two-hander just fine.

Other options include feats like Thunder & Fang and Quarterstaff Master which allow you to treat a specific type of weapon (Earthbreaker and Quarterstaff, respectively), as a 1-h weapon. That scales up to a 2-h weapon if it's one size too big. Lastly, the Sunblade is a Bastard Sword that spoofs a Shortsword insofar as handling goes. The Shortsword is a light weapon so you can wield the Sunblade as if it were a light weapon (taking reduced penalties to TWF, wield it in only one hand, whatever). This means that a Sunblade one size too big would be wielded as a one-handed weapon and one two sizes too big would work as a two-hander. A Medium creature could wield a Huge Sunblade with -4 to attack as a 2-h weapon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In Golarion cosmology, outsiders, if killed on their home plane, dissolve into the "background energy" and become a part of that plane. I view Eidolons as finding an outsider who has been killed and calling their energy (or, at least, some of their energy) back and giving it a form with which to interact with the world. As the summoner grows stronger, he is able to pull out more of the energy and also imagine a stronger, more complex form for them.


The only inconsistency is with Jotungrip. It says "in one hand", but goes on to add in that you count it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of Str to damage, Power Attack, etc. So it effectively falls under the "as a one-handed weapon" category.


@Ciaran: Welcome to Golarion, where the physics are made up and your AC points don't matter.


@Tesoe: I think I understand the source of your misunderstanding now.
You have to read the full FAQ, including the question that prompts the answer:

FAQ wrote:

Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?

If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.

It is, specifically, asking about feats and other special abilities that say to "treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one-handed weapon". So the answer, even if it uses the "in one hand" phrasing for ease of understanding by the reader, is still addressing only the question of "wielded one-handed" and doesn't extend to "wielded in one hand" as illustrated by the Lance FAQ. Ergo, no inherent contradiction.


If you're wearing your boots, they are a "part of you" so "you" are touching the ground. Same goes for wearing fully covering clothing. Hypothetically speaking, if you were flying in the air, but your belt were long enough to reach the ground, you'd still be "touching the ground".

A more pertinent point is: what counts as "ground"? Foundation of a building? Paved road? Dirt? Bedrock? Blanket of leaves? Snow? Ice? Mud? If I hold a clot of dirt and then start flying, am I still "touching the ground"? If I levitate a big chunk of "ground" and stand on it, does that still count? What if I'm climbing up a cliff? Standing on the ceiling of a natural cave?


Maybe, but if the distinction is something that was either intended to be different or is a posteriori determined to be beneficial, the distinction will still be there; just with better clarity of language. It's just how "Shooters" was used to categorize both the good shooter games as well as the Modern Warfare/CoD mass-produced FPS. That's why Yatzee came up with the term "Spunkgargleweewee" to refer to the latter. If they were to, for example, categorize the weapons as Light, Medium, and Heavy in place of Light, 1-h, and 2-h, then there would be a much clearer distinction between a Heavy Weapon wielded in one hand and a Heavy Weapon wielded as a Medium Weapon.


To be blunt, it's a complicated game. The solution isn't to dumb down these fine distinctions in the rules but to "smart up" the average player. Space may be limited in written rulebooks, but with online resources available, there's ample space to adequately explain these subtle differences. What we need is an Annotated PRD that expounds on the subtleties of rules interactions like this.


How about a Two-Weapon Warrior? Wield a pair of whips, move into position as a swift action, then full-attack away. Improved Balance lets you suffer penalties as if wielding a light off-hand. Half-Orc and Half-Elf can get racial proficiency with whip. Another option would be Magus. The Whip is a one-handed slashing weapon so it can qualify as a Black Blade.


What we really need is a way to apply Wisdom to get a "vibe" off the item. We've all seen this before, a magical item that a character just "knows" is bad business, but he doesn't know how he knows. Essentially, we need a way to apply Intuition.


The difference is in the wording; "wield in one hand" is mechanically different from "wield one-handed". One-handed is a mechanical term referencing "effort to wield"; light, one-handed, two-handed. By default, a weapon is treated as whatever its base category is; you wield a Greatsword "two-handed" and two-handed, by extension, means you wield it "in two hands". The clause "wield in one hand" is a specific exception to the general rule that two-handed weapons require two hands to wield, and only to that specific rule. It has no bearing or impact on other rules regarding two-handed weapons (ie. get 1.5x Str to damage, get +50% Power Attack bonus, subsumes both a main-hand and potential off-hand attack, etc). A weapon wielded in such a manner would also still qualify for feats/abilities that require you to wield a two-handed weapon (ie. Overhand Chop, Pushing Assault, Shield of Swings, etc).

By contrast, skills/abilities that specify you wield it "one-handed", "as a one-handed weapon", or any variant thereof that involves the term "one-handed", are overriding the base effort category. You are no longer treating it as a 2-h weapon but treating it as a 1-h weapon instead. In this case, it no longer qualifies as a 2-h weapon for feats/abilities that require the use of a 2-h weapon, but it now qualifies as 1-h for feats and abilities that require the use of a 1-h weapon. For example, Spell Combat requires you to wield a light or one-handed weapon and cast spells with your other hand. Even if you were mounted and wielding a Lance, the Lance still counts as a 2-h weapon so you cannot Spell Combat with a Lance just because you wield it "in one hand" because it still isn't a 1-h weapon. But you can Spell Combat with a 2-h weapon that specifies you wield it "as a one-handed weapon" or any variant thereof.


It depends on the size of the settlement in which you shop. For smaller towns and villages, they may have a very limited selection of magical weapons available a la carte so you'd roll to see what's readily available and, if it isn't available, you'd have to make a custom order (which would take crafting time). For larger cities, there may be a presumption that "anything lower than such-and-such gold is considered readily available" and only higher-value items would need to be rolled for.


I guess that would work if you were pistol whipping... but who even does that?


2 levels of Cavalier/Samurai with the Cockatrice order will give you Dazzling Display that you can use w/out a weapon and as a standard action.

1 to 50 of 3,464 << 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.