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

MisterSlanky's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 3,025 posts (3,950 including aliases). 55 reviews. 2 lists. 1 wishlist. 17 Pathfinder Society characters. 6 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,025 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quentin Coldwater wrote:

We were a team of six pretty much optimised veteran players and we were sweating our asses off. Anyone who is underprepared, underpowered, or doesn't know what to do will have a bad time.

I mean, sometimes I like scenarios like that, but as an evergreen... Ouch.

Emphasized why when I get the chance I'll be giving this one probably a 2-star. The randomization on this sucker isn't swingy at all, it's outright deadly. The last thing I want to see is a war of escalation like we had back in Season 4 where it's the new/play for lite fun players that get penalized.

Shadow Lodge

Male Human, probably TPK Causer 4 / GM of Repute 6 / Troublemaker 2

Making sure you know/remember that loaning out gear means you lose access to the entire school of spells associated with the focus item.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well damn, wish I had seen this one.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been playing since the dawn of Pathfinder Society.

I've done a few "spot audits" on the occasional weird gray area rule, a couple brand new players to help them understand the rules, and one full-blown one.

They're not common enough to warrant any kind of formality though, nor should they be.

Most informal audits are just that, informal. If you feel the need to do something more formal and documented, do so. But, if everybody followed the simple rule: "don't cheat", then GMs wouldn't have a reason to do an in-depth audit on any character, and nobody needs to do anything but play and have fun.

So when I said it wasn't public and likely won't be - I was referring to the fact that I don't think anybody needs to see the specifics. There's nothing to be gained in doing so due their rarity. On the other hand, I'll gladly use generalized outcomes from a disastrously failed audit as a lesson learned to both players and GMs of what to expect should you outright violate the rules. I believe transparency in these cases provides a) players with a sense that the GMs and other "leadership" are there to help those that honestly want to be part of the community enjoy the game, and b) to show that there is a penalty for pushing too far and what that penalty is.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mitch Mutrux wrote:
Except by pulling a direct quote from the person in question, you did actually make his identity public. It took me maybe five seconds to plug some keywords from his post into a search and come up with his post. Please be checking yourself.

Except you still don't know who he is by real name or character name, and even if he posts, he's not a even a rare PFS section poster. So there's that. And there's the fact that you chose to go looking for personally identifying information; I did not hand it to you. There's that too. So before you complain about my actions trying to educate, you might also want to look in the mirror. I didn't hold a gun to your head and say, "what's his name!"

I get why some felt that the information was removed, but in this particular case I am in full disagreement. Players should see what happens when this kind of situation arises. They should know the actions one can take to "figure out the puzzle" behind this kind of issue. They should feel empowered to say and do something rather than feel that this all "goes on behind closed doors." But I also believe in transparency vs. trying to make it all quiet. I do not appreciate being told to be quiet about this.

So I'm out. Discuss to you heart's content or don't, but no, I'd rather this thread stand as an example of what you can do to stop a player that's ruining game days for others with a full set of information behind it.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mitch Mutrux wrote:
I agree for the most part, Shifty. Just the last few posts were starting to give off the whole "public shaming" vibe, which is why I'm just piping up now.

Except to be "public shaming", the individual in question must be named to be shamed, which has never happened.

My commentary were direct responses to:

a) Responses to "I don't understand why this is so powerful" questions. That was my initial thought over and over when discussed locally until I saw the sheet. I never expected to see anything so far into left field.

b) A direct response to "what was being created". Knowing that the player is not trying to something that "just couldn't die" that there was a theme to what caused the cheating.

c) A clarification to to the "I can see how this can be misconstrued, the rules are tough" comments. When i did my audit I broke everything into "man, if you don't read that one rule, I can see why you did this" and "Hero Labs makes this red with the words "Not Pathfinder Legal". Again, knowing this nips the continued, "it was an honest mistake" discussion in the bud.

You may not like my responses, but my responses were all factual, poignant, and never once called out the individual. If anything, this completely outlines the value of a character audit in certain cases.

Baval wrote:
i agree its settled, and dont mean to bring this topic up again, but where/how can i read this audit? Im curious as to just what he did

Baval, you cannot read the audit. The full audit isn't a public document and I doubt it will be.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Vrog Skyreaver wrote:
If his goal is 'not die', there are better, more party friendly ways to do exactly that.

His goal was to physically design Spawn.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ragoz wrote:
This isn't how I would want to be treated. I think the everything is mechanically in the clear as far as I can tell so that's good enough for me.

Well...good thing you're not on this end to deal with it then.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Jeffrey - you should not have to deal with that kind of response from a player.

To me this is nothing more than bullying of the players (pushing them to continue) and now bulling the GM (demanding gold).

I can get frustrated with players and their builds all the time (my feelings about the escalation war from several years ago is well known), but this has entered a new level of insanity.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Leg o' Lamb wrote:
But, this player is one who has been a thorn for a long time yet has his supporters. He is a nice guy!

No, we don't want to ban nice people from playing. Nobody wants that.

Leg o' Lamb wrote:
In the aforementioned BK I, table he was the only one of six to survive. The other characters all died due to this player pushjing them on. Ok, it happens, but the follow up is the real kicker: He refused to ffset any of the costs to raise the characters and has messaged the GM demanding to have his gold increased because he was able to get a few items from an encounter they didn't finish

Case in point. He is not an "nice guy".

I've been told he cheats.

I've been told by multiple GMs now "I will not run for him".

I've been told by multiple players now, "I will not play with him."

This isn't a situation of banning the build, and he is most certainly not a "nice guy".

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I still argue that since he's using corner cases for running the character, the GM is in every right to run corner cases in return.

This build is not that powerful if you go on an adventure and simply die because you don't get back in 7 hours.

Or if it's in an unprotected backpack and have the skin take damage on AoE abilities.

Or if (as has been stated to me on occasion) he wears the skin, which case you just target the skin.

When I play and run multiple games and hear players and GMs say, "Oh he's showing up, I will not play there", there's a problem.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
pjrogers wrote:

For what it's worth, VC Petulengro tells the PCs that they'll "arrive in Rosehaven in the morning of the first day of the festival" (p. 4.) And the festival starts one hour after the PCs arrive (p. 5).

I too like the idea of everything taking place at night. Did other folks do this when GMing?

Well technically 11:59 is still morning which for your schedule puts Bertrand's house at 8.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Except Silvertongue, the bardic minion has the same number of ranks. That hardly seems the intent of the ability.

Correction: Investigator Mastermind, my oops.

There are a number of sticking points:

1. Skill Focus - This one is unclear because it's a bonus, but it's a bonus tied into ranks. I lean to thinking this one should be included, but I'm really struggling to show why.

2. +3 trained bonus - This one is weird. Do you use your target's trained qualifier, your trained qualifier, or neither? The language under Skill Use implies it's one of the first two, but again more of an inference than an actual statement.

3. Other bonuses like trait and racial bonuses. These are probably the weakest of the three to infer since (as an example), if I wear a bunch of jewelry for 150 gp and you do not, it hardly seems appropriate for you to get the bonus. So unless there's some other rule somewhere, this feels like a strong no.

Again, the question is, using other class abilities, feats, or sections of the rulebook, is there a good example to pointing out exclusionary language like this? If not, are there any good RAI arguments based on similar topics?

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

#8-06: Reaping What We Sow is now one of the better "light" adventures. It's campy fun that took us less than three hours to play; I'd suggest that one as well.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So why explicitly call out ability bonuses only? Why not explicitly call out the other bonuses?

I'm really trying to find out using other similar rules what the intent was, because I honestly don't think it's that simple.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Simeon wrote:
I'm the aforementioned son, I'm sending my best wishes to Randy and I hope all goes as well as possible. I'm bubbling with ideas for what to build.

Something that gets it nearly killed every session or you're not doing it right.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A couple of us were discussing the Inquisitor Mastermind Power of "A Quiet Word" and can't quite figure out what bonuses the target gets to use.

First the wording...

PRD wrote:
A mastermind’s reputation precedes him. At 1st level, once per day a mastermind can spend 10 minutes preparing an ally to make a single Diplomacy or Intimidate check (mastermind’s choice when preparing the ally) within the next 24-hour period at the mastermind’s behest. This skill check uses the mastermind’s skill ranks instead of the ally’s. The mastermind’s affected ally still uses its own ability bonus for the check.

The hard part is that it's clear you don't add in your ability check (called out explicitly), and it's clear that you add in your ranks, what's not clear is whether any of the following are counted (explicitly because of a rule we're missing, or implicitly because the ability calls out ability bonus separately).

So does the target of A Quiet Word get to add in the +3 trained bonus, or a skill focus bonus, or a trait bonus? Some of those, none of those, all of those? Just looking for thoughts.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
pjrogers wrote:
9:00 am - arrive at Rosehaven, 1 hour before start of festival

For a "horror" scenario I'd adjust that timeline considerably so the majority of the action goes on in the dark.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jack Brown wrote:
Use this as a learning experience, and look for ways you could guide the newbies to a more memorable, pleasurable experience!

Beyond the discussion of how it's improper to reassign level 1 credit, I really think the OP's original concern still stands.

This isn't a learning experience for him to "guide newbies into a more memorable, pleasurable experience," this is directly related to the fear many of us had (and still have) that this new ruling actually encourages poor play rather than "fixes" it as originally stated.

Change everything out to "level 4 pregens and my level 4 character" and I think the point stands.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Shannon Clark wrote:
one thing my players asked about that the scenario doesn't answer

My response to that one...

Spoiler:
My druids don't have animal companions, I pick domains. Why would this druid be any different?

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
profession is anything you want your guy to do as a profession. ANYTHING you want. You could be profession grass growing watcher or profession floor cleaner with toothbrushes, or profession sleeper or profession lazy bum.

I've started making Profession(Pathfinder) characters.

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dominick Trascritti wrote:

Let's just be kind to each other. Let's stop escalating.

Like a tank full of gentle cuttlefish.

I will follow your advice to the letter.

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
Thread was opened and Del defended himself after numerous pot shots against himself.

And the ability to do that has happened before on what occasions?

To what Mark said - this is a "last word" thing. In any other instance this would have never re-opened for the first deleted response. None of us, and I am including in-house Paizo employees that have become engaged in bitter discussions in this, ever get that kind of second chance.

But this isn't a re-opened thread discussion. This is a re-re-opened thread discussion where someone got to redo a rather vitriolic post.

But this isn't a re-re-opened thread discussion, it's a re-re-re-opened thread discussion where somebody (the same person) not only got a redo, but got to respond yet again after the thread had "run its course".

The first time never would have happened under normal circumstances, let alone the second or third.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As that particular faction trait was published in a previous Guide to Organized Play under the Taldor faction. Since that guide no longer exists, per the current guide's language on traits, if you had the trait it doesn't "go away", but it's not legal on new characters.

Shadow Lodge *****

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm sorry, I can't let this go because it really bothers me that this thread continues.

Delbert Collins II wrote:
People need to see this thread as an example that they can discuss topics, even while angry.

Unfortunately, we cannot see the true extent of this lesson. Why? Because the only the lesson after much editing is that I see is you need to have the last word. In your position, are able to do two things the original poster never can.

One, like the original poster, you get to post a vitriolic rant (I have it if you want to see it), that gets deleted. Unlike the original poster though, you get to re-post one that appears as an original, but is not. So while the original complainant's responses exist in all of their glory, you get to appear as if all you did was respond reasonably, which again, you did not.

Two, you were able to get this thread unlocked, not once, but twice. I've never seen that happen in all of my years at Paizo. It's gone too far. Tonya addressed the problem, and well; the over-the top original complaint was dealt with, and the campaign leadership spoke coherently and with the professionalism I'd expect in a response. If we wanted to teach the lesson to not post while angry, then at that point the discussion was over.

So the OP gets the (very reasonable) rebuke, and you get to come off like your crap doesn't stink? That's hardly teaching the lesson of not posting while angry.

I am really ready for this lock/unlock to stop, even if it means that this response gets deleted.

Shadow Lodge *****

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Delbert Collins II wrote:

October 13, 2016

I know a lot of folks have been waiting for my response and I want to thank everyone for their support and restraint regarding this matter.

Not particularly. After the last bit of vitriol you posted that was subsequently (for good reason) deleted, I got this far and stopped.

pH unbalanced wrote:
I'm sure so that the RVC could make his statement, as his was the only viewpoint that hadn't yet been memorialized.

You want the old version? I memorialized it.

The Paizo response was sufficiently, reasonably, and well presented in Tonya's post. The RVC had a chance to respond and blew it to the point the post was deleted and the thread locked. At this point I think it's a forfeited opportunity and as this thread was adequately addressed by Tonya it should have died right there. I too support re-locking this train-wreck.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kevin Willis wrote:
Not quite following you. Are you saying there is currently a published magic item to help with that? Or that you imagine someone could make one to help with the issue?

There is now, as of last night at least when I started flipping through the new Campaign Setting book, a magic item explicitly designed to let you drop open potions on the ground without having them spill.

IMHO - once it's codified in an item that something happens, even if you can't point to the explicit rule that says, "when you drop an open potion vial it spills onto the ground", the common sense rule has a legitimate reference.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kevin Willis wrote:
However, dropping an opened vial without stoppering it is almost certainly going to cause the liquid to spill out. If you are putting it away normally as a move action I'm not going to force you to spend another action to stopper it. But dropping is free. You need some kind of action to put the stopper back.

Imagine, this is enough of a thing that there's a magic item to help with this exact issue.

I challenge the OP to drop his potion at most of the tables I play at and see how the GM adjudicates it. To the original point, of course the spell is overpowered if you try to engineer every corner case to exploit it.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Del_Taco_Eater wrote:
Possibly, and no need to debate that, but all I have to do is drink on my next round. I have spend a total of one swift action to activate the buff.

As a significant fan of AA, I'll explain the other limitation beyond the fact that there's no way to remove the 1-round delay on drinking a potion. It sucks having to keep that potion in your hand after you've drank it. No use of bows, no use of two-handed weapons, no use of the claw/claw/bite attack. Sure you can drop bombs, but not all Alchemists do that.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My first quit read-through had me having positive feelings about this one. I normally really dislike the technological scenarios as I don't really like the peanut butter/chocolate combination of Pathfinder/Pew-Pew, but I really enjoyed the story. Here's to hoping it works out.

I'll try to give impressions after I run it Saturday.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
I make an excellent luck charm.

Clearly we did well in spite of ourselves.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well done SkalCon team for another great Con.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PRD "Handy Haversack" wrote:
While such storage is useful enough, the pack has an even greater power. When the wearer reaches into it for a specific item, that item is always on top. Thus, no digging around and fumbling is ever necessary to find what a haversack contains. Retrieving any specific item from a haversack is a move action, but it does not provoke the attacks of opportunity that retrieving a stored item usually does.

It's a move action that explicitly does not provoke an AoO.

You might be thinking about the whole Oracle/Haunted Curse thing, where it's been clarified that it's still a standard action, not a move action...but doesn't provoke an AoO.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jack Brown wrote:

Chronicles, tracking sheets, water.

Was there something you needed?

As I recall, I will be lending you my serpents rise kit? Did you need minis with that!

The tear rag so you can soak up your player's tears.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Here's one I did (and it wasn't super easy, but it wasn't hard). Go for a heavily armored arcane duelist that acts more like a fighter than a bard. Between Arcane Strike and Inspire Courage, you'll be dishing out a good quantity of damage (even if you don't get the same full attack count as a fighter), but you'll back it up with other class abilities. The key (at least for me) was to go for only spells with no somatic component so I could be wearing plate and a shield.

YMMV, but that's my idea to toss out at you.

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Like Muser, I typically do not buy Handy Haversacks. Extradimensional space items can be pretty awesome for specific characters, but not for everybody. Haversacks are really only common on individuals where I need to avoid the AOO to recover items (such as a wizard) and efficient quivers are common on thrown weapon experts (and the wizard again for his staff collection); however, I've yet to buy a bag of holding. I also do not do STR dumps (except for down to 8 on the really, really rare character). Like Muser I also will extol the virtues of Patfinder Pouches for all time - those things are AWESOME and I now have them on nearly every Pathfinder character.

For those of you really interested though, I do have a Tengu Alchemist in Pathfinder Society that carries a fully packed, to the brim Haversack with the kitchen sink attached. This represents my "cover all bases" pack. Perfect? No, but a start.

Google Docs: Tcreese's Haversack

Shadow Lodge *****

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jon dehning wrote:
This seems appropriate.

I reiterate: Poor Hillary.

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hillary is also unlucky enough to know who her table is in advance. Several of the players have already run Cosmic Captive, and thus we apparently have even picked our path out.

This is like the easiest special ever*, I'd love to run this special**.

*NOTE: This is not the easiest special ever, THUNDERLIPS will be participating.
**NOTE: As THUNDERLIPS is participating, I am not sure I'd love to run this special.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

PS I feel so underprepared for this special. Oh god... I hope I don't tank this as a GM. Too much data... Does anyone one else feel this way? We need to print "I survived GMing Cosmic Captive" buttons.

You're thinking about it too much - specials are not nearly as difficult as they appear on paper. Knowing where we want to focus our effort just makes them even easier!

Listen to the overseer's announcements, and far, far more importantly - keep us on task and not goofing around too much. You'll do fine.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Of course best of luck to Liz, my favorite Paizo employee (don't tell Mark)!

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

My brain is also exploding.

To those who are either local or in Minneapolis on Wednesday:

We're having a meeting at my house on Wednesday to go over the special. If you're interested, please PM me and I'll give you location details.

Hmm

Players too!? I'll be there.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Back hair for...yeah...for Jon!

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jon dehning wrote:
MisterSlanky wrote:

Wow! My birthday is this year too!

Do I get cake?

Have you been a good boy this year?

No, not particularly.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow! My birthday is this year too!

Do I get cake?

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
GM Eazy-Earl wrote:
Look. I'm licking my lips in anticipation of all that delicious cake.

That's not cake, that's a Kitsune.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My favorite part? Listening to the description of the clown car hotel rooms.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nefreet wrote:

No. It means that if you couldn't attempt the roll to begin with, then you can't Aid.

It does not mean that if you couldn't make the DC, you can't Aid.

Those are two entirely different circumstances.

Nefreet, with respect, that's not what the language in the rule reads.

The language doesn't read "if you couldn't attempt the roll" it reads, "In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results". If you have a -1 Diplomacy, you cannot achieve the result of influencing a creature that is hostile; literally the skill restricts who can achieve an influence result by who is capable of the DC, just as the skill of open lock restricts those who can achieve an open door result by who is capable of the DC.

Even the skill language is roughly the same; I fail to see where all these special qualifiers for "couldn't make the DC" come from, as they're not located in the skill descriptions themselves either.

Disable Device wrote:

When disarming a trap or other device, the Disable Device check is made secretly, so that you don't necessarily know whether you've succeeded.

The DC depends on how tricky the device is. If the check succeeds, you disable the device. If it fails by 4 or less, you have failed but can try again. If you fail by 5 or more, something goes wrong. If the device is a trap, you trigger it. If you're attempting some sort of sabotage, you think the device is disabled, but it still works normally.

Diplomacy wrote:
You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature's starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier. If you succeed, the character's attitude toward you is improved by one step. For every 5 by which your check result exceeds the DC, the character's attitude toward you increases by one additional step. A creature's attitude cannot be shifted more than two steps up in this way, although the GM can override this rule in some situations. If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character's attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character's attitude toward you is decreased by one step.

As for trained vs. untrained, the language there reads...

Untrained 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").

Again, very different language than what is in the aid another description, even though it's in the same section. If the aid another meant to mean "no untrained use" it would say, "you cannot aid if you are untrained".

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
I would not put too much weight behind the achieve certain results line, there are certain ways to get higher bonuses on a reroll or after get a bonus after the roll is made.

Just because it's an often forgotten rule doesn't make it not a rule, and one that should carry far more weight than it does.

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

But as Thomas has pointed out, it's not a Pyschic spell. I think that's the point...

Shadow Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
nosig wrote:

ah... then why call it a Slot Zero?

it got that term in LG because that was the Convention Game time before "First Slot" at the Con. So, what comes before Slot One? Slot Zero...

it seems to serve most of the same functions, work much the same way and it's called by the same name... are you sure it is an original creation?

They're not called "Slot Zero". They are called "GM Appreciation Day". I've never claimed anything original about it. It's intent was, as designed by me, an opportunity to thank our GMs by letting them play for a change. The rest grew organically.

1 to 50 of 3,025 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.