|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Chess Pwn wrote:
Hey, if anyone is interested I started a thread to try and get some FAQs for this here. I personally would love for this spell to get some official attention and clarification, and since I am unaware of any threads to FAQ for this question, I created one.
It was already FAQed. The answer is :ask your GM.
I personally don't see the importance of style of playing the disliking of CE.
Unless you get tripped.
Apparently one need enough brain power to be able to cast fireball and the other do not.
My prefered method is using the monster reach to make the Maneuvers without the AoO.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Someone tell the wolves they are too dump to trip people.
In what world that is not an importnat part?
And that is it?
I mean, for example, CE have nothing to do with being smart. It is just fighting defensively (wich should not require a high int, and 13 is a high int, it allow to cast spells such as invisibility) and then it does not interact with high int in any way.
Does artful dodge benefit from a high int? (I guess it does from your post), and does the fluff f having a high int match with the mechanic of the feat?
Melee Toolbox seems to have had as a design goal "give martials a reason to have good Int scores." Artful Dodge alone changes some of the MAD calculations for certain builds, particularly for classes that might be wasting a high Dex score due to armor anyway. In that context, CE doesn't come off so bad.
I don't have that book, but does artful dodge actually have something to do with being smart? or it is having a high int just a prereq for the sake of having a prereq?
I know. But without it being a prereq you will look at it and say "meh" and ignore it just like with dozens of other feat in this game. But well, I suppose I should have said the feat is not that problematic.
Not sure how, The feat itself is not problematic, but using the feat as prerequisite for so many unrelated thing is just an annoying and perplexing bad design.
I love how you said that you know better than the dev.
Arbane the Terrible wrote:
I agree with Kthulhu. That way it would just another "meh" feat and not the horrible feat tax it is now.
THey deliver a lot of feat with CE as a prerequisite to make sure that feat is useful...evil genius.
That is not what he is saying. He is not saying that is good, he is saying that it is possible.
That part of the bible is no more nor less outdated than the rest. What part of the bible is important and what is going to be conveniently ignored is a personal choice. How are you suppose to tell what intolerance/fundamentalism/discrimination is fine and which is not?
I just want to say that someone asked for it but I'm having problem with the credit card (it is the first credit card of my own), I hope to deliver it soon and hopefully it will get a review.
So, people have refused to sell you food in a restaurant because your gender and/or religion?
How exactly he get shot in the eye?
A) There is no body part damage in standard PF, so He just get the damage and his eyes are just fine.
B) You use the called shot optional rule for it.
I agree with weapon snatcher, perhaps is not the most strong option, but it give the rogue an option to do something with their skill that nobody* else can do.
* with the exception of the other classes that get rogue talents, but you get the point.
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
How could there be a nerf FAQ for that talent?
I don't see any bad thing in the first and the second could be equally ok.
Opinions can be wrong, if the argument focus on the opinions and not the persons then there is nothing bad about it. Many times a wrong opinion/statement of mine have been corrected in this forum, many times my opinion about a issue have changed due to argument that other people have made, there is nothing toxic about it.
I can testify that this is a good houserule.
James Jacobs wrote:
Returning to this, What about Asuras? they want to destroy everything in the creation.
And now that we are talking about asuras, how important are them in golarion?
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Ninja ninja ninja, ninja ninja. ...Bard bardbard bard bard BARD bard bard bard bard. Investigator investigator investigator, ranger ranger ranger, slayer slayer.
Dude, don't be rude...alchemist.
That is a good thing. I still maintain that what is written in a law and how things actually are can be very different, and more importantly, that national values are just a collective imaginary at best.
Except the part when you can give them orders and if they fail the opposed check they obey. That's the actual problematic part that should not be in the game IMHO.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Not sure If I'm understanding correctly what you are saying.
Neither. There are personal values, not national ones I would argue. The belief in national values is very dangerous one.
The Fox wrote:
Mostly yes. But I would assume it was not by a vote where it was confirmed by the majority of the population, I could be very wrong of course.
But that is unimportant, the fact that it is written doesn't imply it is truth, and I'm not talking about the law, but about the nebulous concept of "american value", or more generally speaking any concept of "national value".
The Fox wrote:
That is pretty meaningless. At best it codify the values of the one that wrote those documents.
The Fox wrote:
WBL is just a guideline for me, and I never follow it closely. I try to give opportunities in the sense that what PC do and how successful they are is what have an impact in how much money they earn, in this regard I consider consumables pretty useful because they can greatly help in the task at hand. I also like random tables for treasure.
But the usefulness of consumables do vary from campaign to campaign, In pbp games I have a couple of Pc that have never used their consumables.
The Fox wrote:
I don't get it. (speaking from total ignorance of the actual issue), would the law not be unconstitutional?, therefore it should not have even a tiny chance of becoming an actual law.
there is also
You rely on your assuredness and sense of self to help keep your mind clear.
Benefit: You gain an insight bonus on Will saving throws against mind-affecting effects equal to your Charisma modifier (minimum 0).
if you meet the prereq, Divine protection is better though.
My( little) knowledge of PFS is that players can not play evil characters but that in the PF society there are indeed evil members, that would means there is also evil parties I would assume.
So, going full-murderhobo, "Ends justify the(my) means" is something that totally can and do (one could assume?) happen in the pathfinder society, and the pathfinders (the group) are basically fine with that. It is that correct?
(I think) that I recently saw that you DMed a pbp campaign back in ye olden days here in paizo forum, (if I'm remembering correctly) how much fun was that campaign? do you people ever finished it?, how many pbp campaigns have you played/DMed?, any advice for pbp gaming?