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

Lune's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,942 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 4 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 1,942 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Divvox2, I hate to tell you this but it is unfortunately likely true in this scenario: expect table variation.

My personal belief is that the rules on this are contradictory. If you look at the chart for animal item slots it has a column for "grasp". It says:
"Some creater body types are able to grasp and carry one object at a time in their paws, claws, or hands including weapons, rods, wands, and staves, though they may not be able to use such items effectively (GM's discretion) and take penalties for nonproficiency as usual."

So I disagree with claudekennilol that it is a straight out "no" in PFS. However, I think that at best something with a "GM's discretion") is going to be just that unless there is a specific PFS ruling.

I think the logical reading of those rules is to believe that with the proper Int and Proficiencies and Feats that your companion would be able to wield a weapon. Actually, I think I can remember some Paizo published material that had an Animal Companion using a weapon but I can't seem to remember where it was from.

...that being said, some PFS GMs tend to have weird interpretations of what RAW means. I recently made a post regarding this very topic where I was concerned about the potential of a PFS GM ruling against Natural Attacks working with Unarmed Strikes, myself. So even though I am pretty clear on RAW and their intention sometimes it doesn't matter how clear I am as I am not the one ruling on something.

My personal feeling is that I am completely unclear what SKR's point was in the linked post. I have read that whole thread more than once and come away more confused than I went in. On the other hand I read the rules and they seem pretty clear to me.

I side pretty firmly with BBT and graystone on this one. The rules allow them to work together unless you are trying to use the same limb for both attacks. If the design team wanted to change the rules then they have had plenty of opportunity to do so since 2012.

And to be perfectly clear, I agree that this would be an actual change or errata if they were to do so. The intention is clear within the rules already. It spells it out plain and simple. Making Natural Attacks NOT work in conjunction with Unarmed Strikes would be a retraction, rules change or errata. It would not be a clarification of intent.

Since that hasn't happened, I'm sticking with RAW. Luckily in PFS they are required to stick to RAW as well. I think I would honestly prefer that a retraction, rules change or errata not happen here. Nonetheless, as there still seems to be confusion in some peoples minds about this (likely due to SKR's post which was ironically meant to quell said confusion) I hit FAQ for their benefit.

Hm. I'll try to remember to post my son's character build.

How about a Circlet of Persuasion?

I second LazarX's suggestion, especially if this is supposed to be a background buffer character.

For a more active role 7crown has good suggestions. But if this is a DM PC then it might be better in the background.

Hm... I was thinking of the Bracelet of Second Chances, but it seems that might be different. Nevermind. Carry on.

Ooo, I know. I think it is a bracelet though? Gimme a bit.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

RP your Shadow as YOUR Shadow. Like the Shadow of your actual character. Think Peter Pan, here. Downplay the undead type and just use it as a descriptor not as an actual description of your character. It says that it is different from a normal shadow but doesn't complete explain how. I would say that it is safe to assume that it is different in a good many number of different ways. Most importantly, it's alignment matches your own.

If someone at some point mistakes your Shadow as an actual Shadow kindly remind them to check it's alignment before trying to banish it. It would probably be a good idea to have it stick to the floor under your feet during certain RP encounters, though.

Alexander Augunas: That is the same question I am asking here and here. There appears to be some contention on this issue. There is disagreement on both whether your own space is considered "adjacent" or not by RAW and also whether or not the same movement can provoke multiple AoOs if there are separate feats/abilities that allow for one from the same provoking action.

In short... lemme know when you find out for sure as I would sure like to know as well. :)

prototype00: I got two bits for ya here.

1. We were having a discussion in another thread about magic items that can be used while polymorphed. An opinion was shared there by Skylancer4 that I haven't heard shared before. I thought that since wearing gear was fairly pivotal to your builds that you may wish to weigh in with your opinion on what types of gear are usable while Wild Shaped as it may help people here.

2. Have you seen the Canopy Creeper? I ran an encounter with this thing against my party. I am thinking that the reach must be intended to not be what is written... otherwise, um... Combat Reflexes please!

Where did that universal response thread go that we can just link to him? You know... the one that says something like: Step 1: Have an adult conversation with the other players/GM.

Wait a sec... the OP just posted this in the other thread:

Well for a status update, I did talk to my GM, and he has accepted the no PvP rule without player permission to stick...

Doesn't that make this thread a non-issue?

Anyone else read these posts and have a nice chuckle about posters transposing "player" and "character"?

... I mean, at least I am HOPING they are transposing it. ;) Otherwise it might make some of the statements awkward or worse.

Like: "In my current campaign there's two min-maxed players in the party".
Heh... I am also a min-maxed player.

Or: "both players are Chaotic Good and my goal is to fall to Lawful Evil before working my way back to Lawful Good"
Personally, I find that I drift more towards Neutral Good. I don't want to lose any class abilities by changing alignment so I try to keep my alignment right around there.

Or: "Wait... you're trying to find a way to kill your fellow player's because they're stronger than you and the GM is in on it? o_o"
Hang on... did he just... are we talking about real life murder here?!

A +0 Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists is only 4,000gp.

Gilarius wrote:

If anyone finds a way to add dex to damage for natural attacks, it'll be time to really fear those tiny and diminutive creatures!

Therefore, it is unlikely to be possible as a general thing.

It already exists, bro. It was already brought up in this thread.

This enhancement can only be placed on a melee weapon which is usable with the Weapon Finesse feat.

Agile weapons are unusually well balanced and responsive. A wielder with the Weapon Finesse feat can choose to apply her Dexterity modifier to damage rolls with the weapon in place of her Strength modifier. This modifier to damage is not increased for two-handed weapons, but is still reduced for off-hand weapons.

chaoseffect wrote:
Lune wrote:
There are other ways as well. Weapon Versatility or Hamatulatsu Strike and Slashing Grace works.
Slashing Grace wouldn't work with natural attacks are they count as light, not one handed.

You are correct but only because I forgot to include the other part of that puzzle: Swashbuckler's Finesse. Sorry for missing that originally.

There are other ways as well. Weapon Versatility or Hamatulatsu Strike and Slashing Grace works.

Skylancer4: Well, that I can certainly appreciate because I have ran into some douchy calls before.

Do you know of anyone other than you that shares the same opinion? I ask not to disclude your opinion from mattering but because: 1. I have never even heard that opinion before. and 2. if it IS even a somewhat rare opinion I would rather be prepared for it than not for PFS play.

Enforcer has the unfortunate downside of requiring you to do non-lethal damage. Cornugon Smash does not but you can still choose to do so if you wish. Luckily you do not have to choose which one you are getting, you could get both if you so wished. Both are good options for this kind of build.

I agree with Devilkiller. Both work with Shatter Defenses. Cruel is highly valuable in such a build as well. I will be getting Body Wraps of Mighty Striking with Cruel on them. I also highly recommend Anaconda's Coils belt. Carrying around some nets is a good debuff starter as well.

Skylancer4: I still disagree.

I disagree with your assessment of the gloves as well. First of all, you are focusing on the disarming bit while my character wouldn't benefit from that at all anyway. They will be applying to both Unarmed and Natural Attacks. He doesn't "wield weapons" or "grip on her weapons" or even have "held weapons". So every bit of the text you quoted is irreverent. You also didn't quote the whole thing. Let me post it here and I will highlight the relevant parts:

Gloves of Dueling wrote:
These supple leather gloves grant the wearer gains a +4 bonus to his CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder his wielded weapons, and effects that cause him to lose his grip on his weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn't drop held weapons when panicked or stunned. If the wearer has the weapon training class feature and is using an appropriate weapon, his weapon training bonus increases by +2.

You do not have to do anything to activate the item other than wear it. Kinda like a Belt of Giant Strength. You don't "activate" the item when using something that requires a Str check. It doesn't "activate" when you swing a sword just because it applies it's Str to damage. It is an always on affect.

Honestly, I am not certain how you could on one hand argue that the Gloves of Dueling do NOT work but a Belt of Giant Strength WOULD. They are the same. Nowhere in the description of either does it say that they need to be activated.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

B. A. Robards-Debardot's opinion matches my own interpretation of the rules. Like he said (and actually me, before him), if Gloves of Dueling wouldn't work then neither would... well, any item.

Thunder_TBT: Unarmed Fighter 5, Master of Many Styles/Kata Master Monk 2, Mouser Swashbuckler 1, Duelist 4

Havoq: I can get 2 maneuvers per turn unless I get an AoO then I can get 3 (trip can be done as an AoO). I didn't say I did that all in one turn, mind you. But remember that Stunning Fist can be delivered on anything that uses an Unarmed Strike.

FoM grants you one extra maneuver on top of your other attacks/standard action. It will always be worth it.

This is my build:


Str: 16+2=18
Dex: 12
Con: 12
Int: 13
Wis: 14
Cha: 8

MMM= Maneuver Master Monk
Fighter levels are Unarmed Fighter (Though Lore Warden could work well here too)
Rogue levels are Thug

Improved Dirty Trick (bonus), Improved Grapple (1st), Combat Expertise (Human), Flurry of Maneuvers, Stunning Fist, Unarmed Strike
Improved Trip (bonus), Evasion
Fighter 1
Ki Throw (Fighter 1), Binding Throw (3rd), Mantis Style (bonus)
Fighter 2
Power Attack (Fighter 2), Harsh Training
Fighter 3
Dazzling Display (5th), Tough Guy
Fighter 4
Cornugon Smash (Fighter 4)
Rogue 1
Final Embrace (7th), Sneak Attack: 1d6, Frightening
Rogue 2
Shatter Defenses (Talent)
Rogue 3
Quick Dirty Trick (9th), Sneak Attack: 2d6, Brutal Beating
Fighter 5
Vicious Stomp (Fighter 5), Weapon Training
Fighter 6
Greater Trip (11th)
Fighter 7
Greater Dirty Trick (Fighter 7), Clever Wrestler

Though, I must confess that I likely need to take a second look at Sneaky Maneuvers. That definitely belongs somewhere in my build. Honestly, I do not think I could fit it in until post 8th though as I definitely need Shatter Defenses at that level to queue off my Cornugon Smash and that is the level I gain Talents at anyway.

I talk about what the character can do here. It is a bit outdated, though. Here is a snippet:


So this build in a single round could do all of the following: (listing conditions applied in parenthesis)
1. Declare Flurry of Maneuvers
2. Stunning Fist (Stunned) on the first atack which is a...
3. Power Attack triggering Cornugon Smash + Shattered Defenses making the foe (flat footed) and (shaken) for the remainder of the round allowing the rest of the attacks to be Sneak Attacks
4. On second attack use Dirty Trick to (Blind) the enemy.
5. On third attack use Improved Trip triggering Ki Throw (Prone) and Greater Trip another attack which is also a Sneak Attack
6. Since the foe has now been sneak attacked this triggers Offensive Defense (+4 AC), Befuddling Strike (-2 to attacks), Frightening and Brutal Beating (Sickened)
7. Since the foe was Ki Thrown this triggers Binding Throw for a free (Grapple) attempt
8. Assuming the foe is grappled, continue to (Pin)

Next round you can (Tie Up) your opponent, attempt another Stunning Fist if the first one didn't succeed, apply dazzled, deafened, or entangled via Dirty Trick or just continue to beat them senseless with Sneak Attacks.

What I like about the build is that while you are applying your conditions you are not losing out completely on damaging your opponent. With Power Attack and Sneak Attack applying on all of your attacks past the first, and Power Attack applying on the first you are able to contribute some decent damage while making the poor sap your fighting cry because he can't manage to do anything to you. I envision a fight with this guy looking like someone trying to fight Jackie Chan in any number of his movies where he ties them up with their own shirt and is a constant flurry of shenanigans throughout the fight.

Oh, and the CMB really stacks up nicely with Lore Warden granting a flat +4 by 7th level and many of the condition stacking giving the opponent stacking negatives. Blind gives -2 to CMD, Flat-Footed gives denies them adding Dex to CMD, Entangled gives -2 to CMD, Grappled gives a -2 to CMD, Pinned is an additional -2 to CMD, Prone gives a -2 to CMD, Stunned gives them a -2 to CMD and gives you a +4 to CMB.

That is a potential total of +8 to your CMB, and a -12 to their CMD. If they still have a positive Dex modifier after all of that they also lose that. They get another -2 to attacks if they try to do anything except escape the grapple.

And it isn't like they are going to attack you either. Not with the severe negatives they are getting to that: Blind giving a 50% miss chance, Dazzled -1 to attacks, Entangled -2 to attacks, Grappled -2 to attacks, Prone -4 to attacks, Shaken -2 to attacks, Sickened -2 to attacks, Befuddling Strike -2 to attacks and you have a +4 to AC from Offensive Defense.

Thats a total of -15 to their attack and +4 to your AC. That is before using Combat Expertise.

...and that is if they aren't Stunned in the first place.

I have read all of the relevant rules and have come to a different conclusion.

To quote what you wrote above, "Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character's possession (meaning on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated."

I completely agree that this rules out activated magic items. But it makes the distinction that many items do not need to be activated. Those ones would still work when polymorphed. Monk's Robes are a perfect example of something that just needs to be worn to gain the benefits of. It is continually functioning once worn. It is not activated when you use a command word or do something special. It actually says so much right in the description:

Monk's Robe wrote:
When worn, this simple brown robe confers great ability in unarmed combat. If the wearer has levels in monk, her AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the robe lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-Level monk (although she does not add her Wisdom bonus to her AC). This AC bonus functions just like the monk's AC bonus.

It is no different than a Belt of Giant Strength. You just have to wear it to gain the benefit.

Doomed Hero: Just playing devil's advocate here... is that still true even if the feats both describe the triggering condition being "movement"?

I mean, I know that Vicious Stomp and Greater Trip trigger off "tripping someone" and "someone going prone next to you" which are subtly (but perhaps importantly) different. But that seems fairly similar to the current discussion.

So... your argument is that his movement would not normally provoke an AoO because it has already provoked?

Yeah... I sorta do not believe you.


Well, it is less "This thing that normally doesn't provoke now provokes" and more "...he provokes an attack of opportunity from you even if his choice of movement does not normally do so."

I understand you are saying that his choice of movement would not normally do so. This is both because 5' steps and Withdraw actions do not provoke. It is also because you can already have taken an AoO with Underfoot Assault. But Monkey Shine doesn't care why it wouldn't normally do so. It just says, "...he provokes an attack of opportunity from you even if his choice of movement does not normally do so."

Know what I mean?

I get your opinion. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. I can see both sides and your opinion is totally valid, too.

Gauntlets do not give AC.

So... I am confused as to what you mean?...
Do you know what feat it is you are referring to?

TheWhiteWingFamily: What do you mean "take gantlets with a feat"?

Charon's Little Helper: I will not be getting more than 2 levels in Monk or else I would go Qinggong.

TheWhiteWingFamily: Monk means I will be going unarmored.

Skylancer4: Hm. I have never heard of a reading as strict as that. Please do not take offense to this as I know that you are not specifically reading it that way and more just warning me that it could be interpreted that way. That reading seems less than reasonable and more purposefully restrictive. Everything in the Gloves of Dueling are called out as a bonus. It is no more use activated than Bracers of Armor only improving your AC when you are attacked.

The whole bit about the "weapon being wielded" is moot here as well as the "weapon" are Improved Unarmed Strikes and Natural Weapons which are always "wielded". I feel the same is true for Monk Robes. I have never heard the opinion that they wouldn't work while shifted.

I'm not doubting that someone somewhere has this opinion. I do wonder where you are getting this from though. Was there a thread like this where people were expressing such opinions? Has this been backed by a Dev or anything? That reading seems like way beyond a restrictive interpretation and into the purposefully more restrictive than the RAW intends.

Well, you weren't holding up your sign. ;)

claudekennilol wrote:
You have two separate things that allow something to provoke that normally wouldn't provoke (withdraw or 5' step), just because you have two separate things that allow it to provoke doesn't mean it overrides that the same thing can't provoke twice.

Well, I know you say this. But we both know that there is that whole "specific overrides general" rule that I was mentioning before. I can see a valid argument being made stating that the specific is the text in the feats and the general would be the "only one AoO per provoking action" bit.

And yeah, I think they both say that the movement is what provokes. I'm not arguing that, for sure. I guess that it is more that there are two different specific abilities that are giving an AoO even though it comes from one action. I know there are exceptions to the "only one AoO per provoking action" thing but there is no hard way of determining what qualifies for that. It seems possible that this is one.

Mine uses the Improved Trip and Improved Grapple line of feats as well. Ki Throw and Binding throw work well. My build seems very similar to Rycaut's. I have a few levels of Rogue (Thug archetype) to apply Shaken and Sickened. I also use Cornugon Smash/Shatter Defenses to always get the Sneak Attacks in. Brawling Armor helps as I don't care about losing my Monk bonuses.

I could give you a list of planned gear but I can tell you that Anaconda's Coils are high on my list of priorities.

I play the character in PFS and came up against an encounter at level 2 and had the end boss Blinded, Entangled (from a net), Prone, Grappled, Pinnged, Tied Up and I believe Shaken. I think I about made the GM cry. He had the bad guy just give up because there is nothing he could do anymore. You know you have success when you make the GM cry, right? ;)

edit: Oh, and Stunned for at least one of those rounds.

Elias: Yeah, Agile AoMF is definitely the most important item to the build. I was also planning on getting Boots of Striding and Springing.

Skylancer is correct about being able to wear some things after shifting. I do not plan on doing that for much both for concept reasons (I want to look like an actual regular fox), convenience and because there isn't much that I want to use that isn't constant effect anyway.

As for hand slot I had planned on using Gloves of Dueling. I do not see any reason why they wouldn't work while shifted.

claudekennilol: You seem offended. I'm not sure why. You had said:

claudekennilol wrote:
If you're not going to enter the space via Stunning Fist, the only other way I see you can enter a foe's square is if they attack you and if they miss and if you spend your immediate action and panache point to enter their square via Underfoot Assault--I see nothing else that negates that you can't enter an opponent's space.

That seemed like you were saying that I can't enter an opponent's square. This opinion was solidified later when you asked, "So how do you plan on 'just entering normally'?" I thought maybe you had misunderstood the rules for Tiny creatures. So I posted them.

So, um... yeah. I did mean for you to check the part you posted. I thought perhaps you had missed something as I didn't understand your confusion. Since then it appears that we are mostly on the same page. So... sorry about the confusion about your confusion? ;)

I understand that there are two ways of interpreting the wording of Monkey Shine. That is why I was posting.

My major point of contention I stated earlier. There is the rule that states that "specific overrides general". In this case the general rule would be you can only get a single AoO per provoking action. The specific rule would be the wording of the specific feats. Monkey Shine states, "...he provokes an attack of opportunity from you even if his choice of movement does not normally do so."

One interpretation of that is to say that because you have Underfoot Assault which says you would get an AoO if he left your square (which you normally wouldn't get but do because of that feat) that he still provokes from Monkey Shine even though you already took an AoO because the feat says that you get one even though you normally wouldn't because you already took your single AoO.

Another interpretation of it is to say that the wording in Monkey Shine was meant to do the same thing that Underfoot Assault does and grant you an AoO for something that you do not normally get an AoO for. And that it isn't meant to allow you for more than that single AoO.

IMO, one could easily come to either conclusion and have their opinion validated within the rules. I don't know which way it should be.

There is also the issue that if they provoke from moving out of my threatened square the first time and I follow them with the Step Up line of feats and they continue their move to leave my threatened square again. Do you think THAT would threaten another AoO? It is all part of the same movement but it is making them "leave my threatened square" a second time.

Good info, Ellias Aubec, thank you. Lemme know how your character goes if you do make it.

Nah, talking about how many AoOs my character would get.

Hm... not sure if they can change where they are going after I have attacked. I suppose they could but I am thinking they are locked into going somewhere. *shrug*

Actually, it turns out I can't try to trip them. They are too big. :/ I guess I could try to disarm them. meh Anyway, I wouldn't use Dodging Penache to leave their square, I would use Underfoot Assault to move with them. Dodging Penache would just be used to up my AC.

Byakko: So you think you can get more than one AoO from movement. Hm. I figured that this would be a split topic.

2. No, that isn't right. Your attack always goes off before the provoking action. That is for the same reason you can't trip someone when they stand up because your attack goes off before they are standing.

3. Ok. See, that is how I believe it works too. Yes, it is movement that is causing it but it is actually triggered by "leaving your square" rather than the movement itself.

4. Yeah, I'm going to have a few resources to keep track of: Penache, AoOs and Immediate/Swift actions. Maybe I'll use checkers or something.

5. Well, it doesn't work but not for that reason. As stated the attacks from an AoO happen before the triggering action, not after. So that isn't the problem. But as claudekennilol pointed out I do not have the Immediate action economy to do all of this. I could, however, use Underfoot Assault or Dodging Penache on MY turn and do the rest on theirs.

Tiny opponents have to enter an opponent's space to attack them. They can always enter an opponent's space. Check the combat section under "very small creature". They just provoke AoOs from doing so. I plan on mitigating that with Acrobatics checks to tumble and Mobility combined with a sky high AC.

I will be taking Fox Shape. Foxes are Tiny.

claudekennilol: Thank you for posting the links. I was going to do it when I got home. I may still do so if I can edit my post still when I get there.

1. So you are of the opinion that regardless of meeting the triggering conditions for multiple feats/class abilities that the provoking action can only trigger a single AoO? It could be that way, I don't know.

I think I am torn between "specific overrides general" and the general rule of "only one AoO per provoking action.

2. I should have mentioned that I was not referring to using Stunning Fist to enter their square. Just entering normally. In fact, the character in question doesn't even have Stunning Fist; he gets around the requirement by being a Master of Many Styles/Kata Master.

You are correct about the Immediate actions. I failed to account for Immediate action economy all over the place on this one. Not sure how I missed that. That sucks a bit as it eats in to his Swift action during his turn. On the plus side the only thing I have to use my Swift actions on my turn are starting Monkey Style and that is only once and using Deeds.

4. Ah, you are correct. The Step Up line only works when they 5ft step away, not Withdrawing. You are right here, however I would still get an attack on them from moving away due to the wording of Monkey Shine he would still provoke from moving away. In fact, I'm inclined to think that he would provoke due to Underfoot Assault as well. Right?

Well, this has all been valuable to me as it really removes the need of Sidestep altogether. I already have an ability that basically does the same thing with Underfoot Assault so I don't really need it and it eats into the same actions that my Step Up line of feats do.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Underfoot Assault is from the Mouser Swashbuckler. Monkey Shine the last feat in the Monkey Style line of feats. Sorry, can't link them here right now due to limitations by work websense filter.

I am inclined to say only one because the provoking action was movement that only happens once. However, there are two different sources generating the AoO so it is difficult to know how many are intended.

I have more complicated questions to stack on top of this, as well. Lets say that you have a Tiny sized character that has Underfoot Assault, Monkey Shine, the full Step Up line of feats (through Step Up and Strike), Sidestep, a Fortuitous Answering Weapon and he retains Opportune Parry and Riposte (by putting a level into Kata Master). Say this character starts his turn in his medium sized opponent's square and on the opponent's turn the opponent moves away with a withdraw action.

1. How many AoOs do you get on him?
Monkey Shine says that you get an AoO even if their movement would not normally provoke one. Underfoot Assault doesn't have that wording but just says you get an AoO from the movement. I'm inclined to say that qualify for an AoO but this harkens back to my original question about how many AoOs stack on a single provoking action.

2. So after he tries to move away you can follow him, right? And since you are moving back into his square this provokes another AoO, correct?

3. Do you get any additional AoOs from the movement of the foe after your reactive movement from the feats from my second question?

4. When the foe is trying to move away I could use a Trip attack against him. Since the character doesn't have Improved Trip this would provoke an AoO. With Opportune Parry and Riposte I could counter attack him. If I succeed (and I am likely to with both Answering and Monkey Shine bonuses giving a +8 total) then his attack doesn't go off and I would get my original attack (the Trip) as well as the attack from Opportune Parry and Riposte correct? ...and another from Step up and Strike? ...and another AoO at -5 from Fortuitous? ... or actually 2 additional from Fortuitous because Opportune Parry and Riposte counts as an AoO too?

5. So after all of the Step Up, Following Step, Step Up and Strike and Trip (provoking an AoO that I counter with Opportune Parry and Riposte) goes off could I then follow that up with Dodging Penache (and Underfoot Assault) to move into any other opponent's squares who I might have passed by during all this movement and move into their square to rinse, wash and repeat?

6. There seems to be no limit on the feats and deeds aside from the number of AoOs that I can take and the number of Penache points I have. So those seem to be the only limiting factors, right? I don't think that movement from the feats are limited as long it is a different foe providing the triggering actions. So really just limited by Penache and # of AoOs, right?

Devilkiller: was that in a post from the Dev? Do you happen to have a link to it? I have a character that uses that and would like to know for future rulings.

I was going to post that very thing, Katydid. RAW I do not believe you can have claws while you are a bird. Period.

For home games I would think it would be reasonable to allow, though.

It would be sweet if I had some shades while in fox shape, huh? Man, I bet a fox would look cool in shades.

I'm not digging the Vambraces or Bracers. I'm going to have to see what I can find that might be better.

Its too bad I can't stack reduce person with Fox Shape cause that would be great for the sipping jacket. ;)

I still strongly dislike that rule. It seems ideal for Monks... who can't wear armor or lose out on class abilities. I still think it was a mistake in writing and is not the intent. Ah well.

...what? Oh, god, they are just getting hilarious with it now. I'll have to check it when I get home.

As big of a Danny Trejo fan as I am I like the Godzilla and Mr Bean an awful lot.

edit: Oh, and the Mr. T one.

FAQ'd for great justice!

I understand that. But not everyone reads to the 60th post in a thread. ;)

1 to 50 of 1,942 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.