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

Sebastian Hirsch's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,736 posts (2,086 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 4 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,736 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just a note, according to page 23 of the PFS Guide to organized play every Pathfinder can buy a Wayfinder for 250 GP.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Woran wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

Well turns out it is easier to write dialoge yourself, that it is to translate it... yup, just had to check again^^

The mighty link..

Go crazy ^^

Looks good. I did spot a few minor spelling mistakes but otherwise its fine.

Yeah I used the google spell checker (I usually write this stuff in a google drive doccument, to make it pretty hard to lose in case of crash or sudden windows updates) and it isn't great.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Matthew Pittard wrote:
It is also normally the job of the VL to eventually replace their VC? So they might be groomed into the position slowly so the transition is seamless. Or if the VC suddenly has to leave the job (voluntarily or involuntarily) then an VL can be ugraded pretty quickly.

Your are making it sound like VCs and VLs are like Sith and their apprentices, frankly I am not sure most would agree ^^

And obviously it will become really confusing once TOZ gets involved.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kinevon wrote:
Cebo wrote:
The more they sell I would assume they'd charge less. I don't see the scenarios as exceptionally better or worse then LG and I think that was mostly volunteer - or at least really low pay. Sorry.

Living Greyhawk used a very different model for scenarios.

Core was done by group-of-authors-A. Later seasons of LG Core were, seriously, brutal. Both in quality and in content. Even moderate optimization was nowhere near survivable. Some of the content I had experienced in LG Core made both Krune and the part of Bonekeep I have played look friendly. Where else would you find a mummy in an APL 1 scenario?

Each region had their own stable of authors, and the quality was all over the place. Material was vetted by the region's Triad, IIRC, and that was always something to behold. Especially when a convention came up, with their own Battle Interactive, and someone wanting to do a special Quest for one reason or another.

Heh. I remember a scenario where you almost automatically either had to get an Atonement, or retire the PC. And that applied to all the PCs, not just someone with Cleric or Paladin levels. Not to mention that some regions were downright Paladin unfriendly.

That sounds like it would be preferable to put your foot in a bacon slicer, rather than subject your self to something so antagonistic and impenetrable to new players.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Auriea wrote:
I have to say, that even though some would call it a thankless job, I would have to disagree. The VLs in San Diego are quite knowledgeable and are willing to help anyone with a question or three. Personally, I highly appreciate the help with organizing, conducting, and general attitude when it comes to the game days. Would be nice to know as to what munchies I can provide them on game days as well...... Not to bribe anyone of course.....

So far 100 % of my sample group have reacted quite well to cookies, and I am considering to ask a couple of regular to chip in and get him a box of pawns he does not yet have.

For the last game day, I prepared a combination of shortbread and earl grey muffins, people seemed to like them.

Oh and when people like me call it thankless work, it is usually in reference that a lot of the things VL and other organizers do, is behind the scenes. If everything works swimmingly, their work really doesn't come into focus.

Also providing food to your GMs is not a bribe, but you might want to consider your choices, fatty food like pizza can be a bit tiring.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kinevon wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
I had not considered, that the shield could be available from another source, what a weird situation.

Just as a side note:

The Celestial Shield is not the only thing that shares a name between sources in Pathfinder.

Examples:
Dueling as a weapon enhancement.
Dueling 1 is from the APG, reprinted in UE
Dueling 2 is from the Pathfinder Society Field Guide.
Timewise, APG came first, then the PFSFG, then UE, so it is not a case of one replacing the other, they are separate enhancements with the same name, leading to a +1 Dueling, Dueling whip....

I was aware of those, in the case of the celestial shield it is not legal from UE (see the chronicle sheet) but is legal from the ARG... which is a bit confusing. All your examples are PFS legal - to the best of my knowledge ^^.

We even have a case where he have 2 spells called carry companion one is a first level spell one requires a second level spell slot and is available for far fewer classes... and one of those can pretty much kill the pet owner.

Not ideal, and confusing but at least both are legal.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would like to add that once you are VC or VL you are no longer allowed to be mean to people on the boards.

If you break that rule apparently, apparently some people feel that getting told that they are wrong by a VL is pretty much literally worse than several genocides...

One of the reasons why one of our local VLs really doesn't post very much at all here... of course since I am completely unfettered, I can agree or disagree with pretty much everybody, without causing undue stress peoples nether regions.

Obviously being a VL is an be a pretty thankless job, and it seems mostly fit for quite motivated people with spare free time, just like with most GMs, be happy that you don't have to pay them - their time and money investment is pretty significant.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Forgive me for playing devils advocate for a couple of short sentences (ignore the avatar ^^).

advocatus diaboli:

I think there is a legitimate argument to the point argued by the OP.

Imagine the following situation, we have a relatively new player and a small lodge filled with veteran players, who have player literally everything. Now that lodge doesn't actually play all that often, however CORE seems like a godsend to those people.

Of course the new player wants to participate in CORE, if only to make the table legal, however that player is not really interested in a simpler game, he just wants to play.
Now that player enjoys a number of non-core spells and would like to keep using them, if he asks the experienced players (who should have plenty of chronicle sheets)... should they keep the information from him.

The argument "maybe CORE isn't for you" doesn't really work, since without that player a number of other players don't have a legal table.

Why deny someone something he can always research (even if he has to spend money to buy all available scenarios) if it makes the situation in his lodge better ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------

While I am not really keen on the whole CORE idea, I really don't hate it, I might even GM it, but I would currently not prefer a CORE table to a classic table. Making a table legal is another matter obviously.

I think the really big problem when it comes to CORE, is based on the narrative, a rather small number of people didn't praise CORE for advantages like simplicity and ease of access.

They were really happy not having to deal with options X, Y and Z which are terrible and destroy scenarios, and they could not wait to tell everybody about it. This argument, is pretty dangerous since it can easily offend players using (or even liking) those options, which results in things like the OP.
Excluding people and claiming that they are having wrongbadfun is poison for our still pretty small community.

So let me reiterate, can you break adventures in core, of course you can, especially if you work in teams, but since it is easily possible, it really isn't all that impressive.
Some adventures will obviously be a little bit more complicated, considering the loss of some options, but I doubt, that they pose a significant roadblock to experienced groups.

So just be nice to each other and don't try to antagonize the GMs since this is a battle everybody will lose, and quite likely result in dead characters.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kevin Ingle wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Has there ever been a discussion before on why scenarios aren't available per subscription?

It's been asked numerous times...I believe most of them are in Website Feedback.

Long story short, two main reasons stand out that I remember. One, their subscriptions are based on shipping physical product to trigger a release of PDF's to accounts. Two, what does it really give the consumer in terms of value, as there's not that many fewer clicks to do once a month when you buy scenarios and download them here vs. getting a notice and coming here to download them once a month. So far, Paizo has felt that wasn't enough of a real incentive to spend the manpower creating the subscription model for the PDF only product from what I can tell.

EDIT: Here's one of the threads if you wish to peruse.

I can't believe I am actually saying this, since it happens to be a cancer in the video game world, but why not offer a season pass? Let people pre-purchase a wholes season of scenarios, add the scenarios to their account as soon as they come out... profit?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

An increased scenario cost, is something I would be able to embrace, but frankly I think I made that suggestion quite some time ago, when it comes to the Pathfinder Rules Team and the speed of FAQs and scenarios.

In that case it didn't seem that throwing money at the problem would be a possible solution.

In this case, this essentially boils down, to giving more work to more authors as well as additional work with editing and creating art assets. That seems reasonable.

If possible I would love full page spreads of all custom maps in the scenario, so those with a large printer or access to a copy shop can easily print the maps. Not having to draw maps is a major time saver.

Also a picture for every VC should be an attainable goal, I really would love to get one for Venture Captain Calisro Benarry.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well turns out it is easier to write dialoge yourself, that it is to translate it... yup, just had to check again^^

The mighty link..

Go crazy ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well some boons like the custom order boon already seem very attractive to a wide range of characters, so I get what you are trying to say.

Obviously the "let me grab something from my hunter's chronicle sheet" boons should require the buyer to have a high enough level to have earned the chronicle.

Your suggested wording is a great idea (and frankly, increasing the GM rewards never really crossed my mind), that way high level characters don't get "dragged down" by lower level players.

I had not considered, that the shield could be available from another source, what a weird situation.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jayson MF Kip wrote:
I'm not sold on the last two, but I'd be pretty happy with the first one. It's the flavor text. It's awesome. Maybe call it "Favorable Recollection".

Love the name^^ obviously all boons deserve some flavor (and I have some ideas in mind) but I wanted to wait until the the mechanical effects are assessed/changed.

Some examples have some pretty awesome boons (Night Marsh of Kalkamedes, Fortress of the Nail etc..) some have pretty nice loot, like the otherwise not PFS legal keen longbow or the celestial shield.

I hope that the existence of boons like this could reduce the amount of meta gaming involved.

UndeadMitch wrote:
I agree that the first one is pretty cool. I'm okay with the ones that just unlock item access, but the second one that allows for the alteration of a chronicle seems pretty murky to me. It could work, but I think the ability to pay PP to use it after the scenario has to go. I think the third one is probably too good, I know of some chronicles that have items (wands, mostly) that I would like to give to all of my characters.

Well there are certainly situations where your character is ready and willing to play in the higher tier, but the APL is dragged down by missing players and lower level characters. It happens.

Obviously those boons need some caveats, like "you can use this to buy a limited item twice, so no dual wielding Gamin the missforged", and some other ways to limit the power "like you can only buy a single item from another chronicle, and if the item is limited, this purchase reduces that limit", or something like that.

And I really cant gauge the availability of player boons, but would a once per character limit be appropriate ?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Disclaimer: Thus far I have successfully avoided getting a player boon by virtue of not going to many conventions.

That said, after playing for a couple of months, I noticed that the nature of chronicles leads to some ... unpleasant results. Since researching chronicle rewards before you play a scenario is regarded badly (personally I expect it to lead to some unfortunate group compositions, when suddenly everybody is an archer trying to get the keen longbow).

And while GMing the scenarios is a solution for a small number of players, obviously many of us can't actually offer a scenario in some areas.

The following player boon ideas could benefit players who have been unlucky enough to have their group slip into a lower tier (despite their own character fitting into a higher tier), and in those cases where a very attractive item is on a chronicle owned by a character, that will never buy it.

Upgrade Chronicle - Shopping wrote:

A great number of stories change in the retelling, the monsters become fiercer and the traps more deadly.

Chose a previously earned chronicle, if you didn't get access to all the items on the chronicle sheet, you can expend this boon to gain access to all purchase able items on the sheet.
This doesn't allow you to reset the purchase limit on limited items, but it will allow you to buy the items your party missed in the scenario and those locked to a higher tier of play.

This boon does not improve other rewards on the chronicle (like the limited use of an item for a scenario etc.)

Requiring GM changes/documentation on this boon and the original chronicle.

Improved Rewards wrote:

You can use this chronicle when you finish a scenario, or use it later with an additional 5 point PP cost.

If you successfully finish the scenario, but boons aren't unlocked on the chronicle sheet (due to your tier), you can expend this boon to modify that chronicle sheet, to give you the rewards of finishing the scenario in the highest tier.

Shopping party wrote:

Choose a chronicle owned by another (living) character under the same PFS number (add a field for the GM to add the character number and chronicle number), you may buy items from that chronicle sheet as if your character had earned the chronicles herself.

It is quite early in the morning so the grammar could use a lot of work, but I really didn't want to further procrastinate this post. And obviously I didn't include all the necessary caveats to properly protect those boons against abuse just yet, in any case I doubt, that I have the necessary experience with the available chronicle sheets.

In any case, I am sure that you have other awesome ideas for boons, and I would be delighted to hear them.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
redward wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:

AN easy way to balance outsider races would be to include all of them but

require them to have 4 chronicles for levels 1 and 2.

Your solution to balance a powerful race option is to give them 1/3 more WBL for the first two levels?

Sounds more like forcing native outsiders to take the slow XP track for their first two levels, would be more in line with his intention.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Robert Hetherington wrote:
pauljathome wrote:
Pleasing all of us is a literally impossible job. We want different and opposing things. Mike does an excellent job of trying to keep us all reasonably happy.
I want a pony.

Lucky you, ponies are CORE legal ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Helikon wrote:

FOLKS its simpel. PLEASE.

Core is like a club for naked people completly without clothes. You can enter if you do wear nothing. PERIOD.
If you want anything else, its like taking a shirt to the club. The chap at the entrance says. Sorry mate. The whole world allows clothes but we in the club want you naked. Even if you think that your shirt I LOVE NAKED PEOPLE is absolutly fitting for the club. It isn´t!
So either you take of ALL of your clothes and enjoy the clubs fabolous buffet, or you keep your shirt and go to the other part of the country club!

While I love your example, even if the buffet comment might be a bit to specific ^^, you know that you are talking about gamers.

You would pretty quickly get people trying to sneak in things in their mouths or other orifices, and of course people experimenting with latex suits painted to look like they are naked.
Once that doesn't work people will try for body paint, painted to look like a +2 chainmail ... ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Working on it, so far more than 3 pages. Also I am taking some liberties with the translation.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:


Oh and the term "with peccadillos that other characters can role playing against. " is pretty disgusting.

Merriam-Webster:

peccadillo - a small mistake or fault that is not regarded as very bad or serious

I do not see why you find this disgusting, unless you believe that the term "peccadillo" automatically means some form of sexual deviance, which is does not.

My reference to video games is probably a bit dated since I primarily played those during the early 1980's. The video games I played all permitted only a limited number of choices to be "successful" at the game. I view the requirement for mechanical optimization in PFS in the same vein.

The problem is, that one persons peccadillo can be quite detrimental to other players, and the since this is a cooperative game, you are supposed to cooperate with other players.

They already have enough problems in their way, they don't require other players to be difficult.

Obviously that does not mean that players should not have quirks and memorable features, just the "against " part is a problem.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I agree with Leathert, but for Shelyn users there is still the deific obedience of the weapon in Inner Sea Gods.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think it comes from Ultimate Campagin, that animal companions are NPCs and thus the GM has the right to control them (most GMs don't even want to do so), regarding attacking people, unless the GM can present a reason for it (magic) that is pretty much out of the question.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I will start translating it later tonight after the PFS game tonight.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


oh knock it off with the video game dross. Its random, insulting, nonsensical blatherskite.

Everyone is role playing an adventurer. You go off to the middle of nowhere, hike through miles of wilderness, get attacked by weird monsters, infected with diseases and stabbed with poisonous appendages. If something about that screamed that it was a perfect time to play a sickly dilettante then what you're complaining about is the fruition of the narrative you chose to playing reaching its likely conclusion.

Your first paragraph makes no sense.

As to your second paragraph, role playing to me is about acting out a personality, irrespective of being an adventurer. The fun is in interaction with other characters, and how they respond to your quirks, shortcomings and strengths. If all there was to role playing was being an adventurer and overcoming physical obstacles, then any suitable set of stats, abilities and classes will do. That is ho-hum for me without the interaction part. I've seen that and done that for a long, long time.

Other players might be spending their time and resources to come to PFS games for other reasons, their fun is equally important.

Pink Dragon wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:

There's a logical disconnect here.

As in, your statements seem to be made with a "home-game mentality;" you claim to want agency, while you expect a GM or some other player to play off of. You can't rely on someone else to sacrifice their enjoyment to satisfy yours.

Yes. I have played PFS for about a year now. Some PFS games I have played have provided this "agency" for me, but very few. It is apparent to me that PFS cannot generally provide what I seek because the majority of PFS players do not seek the same thing I do. I will be restricting myself much more to home games as a result.

Home games can and should cater to their players, considering the "run as written" doctrine, PFS GMs aren't allowed to make substantial changes.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:
Jayson MF Kip wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:


A 14 CON requires 5 points of your 20. If you are playing a SAD class that may be doable but playing a MAD class makes that a bit untenable.

I'm pretty sure a living character with a 14 STR does more damage than a dead one with an 18.
Precisely why PFS is more of a video game.
Because you can lose?

I "lose" when I don't have fun. I have fun playing characters with peccadillos that other characters can role playing against. Sustained fun assumes that your character will be around for a while. If the game requires your character to be built in a certain way to survive, then all the fun that you can have with a character not built in that certain way is lost quickly.

Video games require set responses to challenges. If your character cannot respond with the set response then the character dies. When the character dies then the fun of playing that character dies too.

We don't play random character, we play pathfinders and we go on an adventure. These adventures tend to reward us pretty well, so we can survive the next one.

Oh and the term "with peccadillos that other characters can role playing against. " is pretty disgusting.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


I highly recommend the 14. Its only 5 points. Its not just dying that you need to worry abou, you also need to worry about having your hit points drop so low tha you're a liability to the party rather than an asset.

This is statement is my whole issue. Characters are "required" to have certain features to be an "asset" to the party, irrespective of how the player wants to envision the charcter.

Players aren't required to do so, the high CON thing, is just one of those things that the community has come to believe.

QUOTE="Pink Dragon"]

Jayson MF Kip wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:


A 14 CON requires 5 points of your 20. If you are playing a SAD class that may be doable but playing a MAD class makes that a bit untenable.

I'm pretty sure a living character with a 14 STR does more damage than a dead one with an 18.
Precisely why PFS is more of a video game.

As someone who play quite a lot of video games, how exactly is this a real complaint? Quite a number of video games took a lot of inspiration from D&D and sometimes ideas from video games were integrated into Pen and Paper games.

I fail to see why you use this description, it is hardly very useful since video games aren't a very all encompassing term.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Pink Dragon wrote:

I'm glad to see that some GMs will skip combat for role play, though that is few and far between in my experience.

Some Tier 7-11 scenarios do give wiggle room for the unoptimized, and others don't. Even then, the ones that leave room often end in some character deaths even if there isn't a TPK.

I can recall quite a number of low level scenarios without any siginificant RP part, and a number of high level scenarios with quite a bit.

Not being properly prepare can be deadly in both.

It sounds bad, bad undead shadows don't really care why a player character eschews certain magic items, they will just kill him and converse with their future shadow brother about it.
Ghouls will just paralize and eat you.

One of those examples came from a 7-11 and one from a 1-5 scenario.

Players can always RP among themselves if they have time even if the scenario doesn't specifically have PC/NPC role play parts. At high Tier, even inter-PC RPing is often limited by time constraints to finish the scenario.

Ghouls can be struck and killed by anybody with anything. That is just a save or suck problem, which is a problem at all Tiers. But any character can actually do something about a ghoul.

Shadows and other incorporeal undead are definitely an issue at low Tier that reflects many of the problems with high Tier play. I have an issue with that too at low Tier.

Off topic discussion :

Players can RP between themselves before, after and outside of scenarios. The fact, that high level play in pathfinder tends to involve longer combat is one ot the "features" of the D20 system.

The system tends to become moer unforgiving as players level up and gain new abilities, that is only natural. However as the guide mentioned, this can be a scaling issue. Most characters will be able to survive a low level challenge with a chainshirt and a mace, but once you level up a couple of times, the system expects a bit more system mastery.

Since players can access some pretty powerful stuff, it is only natural that enemies get new toys too.

It is ok not to like higher level challenges, but some of the complaints/requirements are part of the system

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Pink Dragon wrote:

I'm glad to see that some GMs will skip combat for role play, though that is few and far between in my experience.

Some Tier 7-11 scenarios do give wiggle room for the unoptimized, and others don't. Even then, the ones that leave room often end in some character deaths even if there isn't a TPK.

I can recall quite a number of low level scenarios without any siginificant RP part, and a number of high level scenarios with quite a bit.

Not being properly prepare can be deadly in both.

It sounds bad, bad undead shadows don't really care why a player character eschews certain magic items, they will just kill him and converse with their future shadow brother about it.
Ghouls will just paralize and eat you.

One of those examples came from a 7-11 and one from a 1-5 scenario.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Still reading, but even on the second page there are a few item I would pretty much require in 1-5. ^^

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

A magus can and quite often does take the close range arcana to be able to use things like ray of frost and enervation with spellstrike.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
wakedown wrote:

I'm certainly starting to be highly flexible in how I ajudicate pulling out an item during a move action in my home games (largely because of 5e's influence in allowing anyone a single interaction during any move action being an awesome simplification of the game).

Another question along this same vein would be how to handle retrieving an item from a haversack.

I believe by-the-rules, pulling an item from a haversack is an isolated move action that cannot be taken as a free action while moving.

Handy Haversack, Core pg516 wrote:

A backpack of this sort appears to be well made, well used, and quite ordinary.. 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.
However, what if the item you are pulling out of the haversack is weapon-like? Would the "draw a weapon or weaponlike object within easy reach" rules kick in and override the magic item's text that says it's always a move action?

To quote from your earlier post :

"If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item" an the item is clearly in a pack, so the retrieve item action has to be used. Which mit be a bit silly, especially since th efficient quiver allow you to draw it like you draw from a sheath.

At this point, I would only make commong sense limitation, and allow pretty much everything else.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dragonslayer0429 wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

We really need more details, as the others have mentioned nearly everything is somehow possible.

Sneak attacking grappler - check
Strangling people with your hair - check
Hitting people with mithral waffle irons - check
Killing this with a spoon - check (see magus class for details)
Shoot arrows to hit touch AC - check (and damn good)
Hexing people with unarmed strikes - check
non-lawful monk without supernatural stuff - check

--

You could always try just to break the RP mold, like playing a two weapon fighting, lightly armored paladin (who isn't a party pooper - I suggest Shelyn ^^).

I am intrigued at learning more about those different builds you listed above.

In order Brawler with the two archetypes that mention sneak attack in the ACG.

White haired witch witch archetype 1-2 levels then add something like magus. STR Ranger has it in his hexcrafter magus guide.

Pretty much just a high strength character with the catch off guard feat and a mithral waffle iron for style reasons (and overcomming DR) works rather well with a magus and arcane pool, to make it a +1 flaming mithral waffe iron. However there are other classes and archetypes out there that work well with improvised weapons.

Just be a magus and use your arcane pool the enhance pretty much everything that can be used as a weapon, killing the bbeg with a +1 flaming wodden duck is just gravy.

ACG has a ranger archetype that has panache, and allows the user to make single arrow attacks against touch AC for a point of panache, and it can refill the panache pool with ranged attacks. It is pretty cool and great for vital strike using archers. Also a wand of gravity bow.

There is a feat that allows characters with the hex class features to use a hex as a swift action following a hit with an unarmed strike.

Martial Artist monk archetype removes ki pool and a couple of other things.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Victor Zajic wrote:
What if I dedicate the killing of my animal companion in the name of Urgaothoa, prepare a meal out of the remains, then animate the skeleton? Is that too evil to get away with neutral alignment? Just because I'm a Seperatist Cleric with the animal domain doesn't mean that Urgathoa doesn't keep sending me new animals.

Killing your animal companion in a ritualistic fashion is a bad thing to do, and I really would not do it in the presence of any of my hunters. I would call it evil, especially since animal companions mention the phrase " form a close bond with", this is very much a table variation matter.

I still can't forget the time a pig sacrificed itself an an old super nintendo game.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Adding the following item to the discussion, which has interactions with the agile weapon enhancement and uses language similar to the mithral entry: (The item is for reasons of sanity not PFS legal btw)

Effortless Lace wrote:

Price 2,500 gp; Slot none; CL 15th; Weight —; Aura strong transmutation

DESCRIPTION

This elegant silk ribbon gleams like mithral and feels like polished steel.

When wrapped around the grip of a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for 24 hours, the ribbon's magic permanently merges with the weapon, reducing the attack roll penalty incurred by a wielder who is smaller than the weapon's intended wielder by 2 (to a minimum penalty of 0).

If the weapon is wielded by a creature whose size matches that of the weapon's intended wielder, the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons.

Once an effortless lace's abilities have been conveyed to a weapon, the ribbon must remain attached to the weapon or its effects end immediately, its magic is permanently lost, and it is reduced to worthless cloth. Effects that would dispel the magic of the weapon or cause the weapon to gain the broken condition (such as sundering) destroy the ribbon as well.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
claudekennilol wrote:

No GMs are going to audit your character anyway. So it won't matter when you simply tell him "you have brawling on your armor".

Now here comes the half a dozen people saying that someone will. Not the other tens of thousands of people that have never had their character audited.

So if you feel it's fair and it's only slightly a gray area (like this) then go for it.

Funny thing, but I will. No ifs or butts about it, if a player gives me a reason to believe that his character includes some questionable assumptions, I will do an audit.

When this happens is obviously another issue, I am willing to venture the statement that characters that under and overperform get those audits. There is really no malice to it, if I audit it and see the mistake/questionable ruling I will tell the player.
You really don't want the GM to "catch" you in the middle of an adventure, since that tends to result in quite a bit of conflict.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
wakedown wrote:

Also of note when having this discussion is the Quick Draw feat:

Quick Draw, CRB pg131-132 wrote:

Benefit: You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

A character who has selected this feat may throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow).

Alchemical items, potions, scrolls, and wands cannot be drawn quickly using this feat.

Normal: Without this feat, you may draw a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement. Without this feat, you can draw a hidden weapon as a standard action.

Quick Draw doesn't employ the term "weaponlike objects" at all.

The part in italics is new to Pathfinder from 3.5e as well, and specifically excludes wands, which in some ways is boggling. If drawing a wand was made out to be just like drawing a dagger everywhere else in the rules, it suddenly gets excluded with this feat. The fact this sentence exists and lumps together "alchemical items, potions, scrolls and wands" almost suggests those items should all be treated similarly in access speed. (Universally for all rules? Of course not, that would make the same too smooth/clean to run!)

Rods are not mentioned, but I'd likely allow someone to employ Quick Draw with a rod - in fact, outside of PFS I'd be tempted to liberally let Quick Draw apply to almost anything.

I noticed that recently, I was actually considering the feat for a character with a quickdraw shield, but it really does not work, it seems I have to continue to let those wands fall to the ground.

Arguing, that I can tether a wand with a weapon cord to my shield arm could work, but it is not quite RAW.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The problem with wrist sheaths is that they are usually a fluff item used to hide a dagger of similar item. They really are not intended for combat (in the real world that is), the fact that so many pathfinders feel forced to run into adventure with a bit of clockwork at each arm is soo weird.

Oh and when I remember some of the older action movies, it wasn't uncommon to see a badass with a bandoleer filled with grenades.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
if you have it strapped to your character in a similar fashion as a sword (like potions being in a bandonlier or strapped to your belt, probably), just at my table don't imagine you'll be able to put your whole list of items on your belt.

Well I feel this will inevitably fall in the same are as limiting free actions. Talk to your GM about a reasonable number of items. Just like there is no ruling about the maximum number of quivers you can carry at the same time... 57 might be a little bit much.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ethereal Gears wrote:

Hey guys.

I've tried searching for threads that answer this question, but I've found none, so I'm making my own. It's rather a simple query I have.

If I have a character with one level each in Swashbuckler, Sleuth Investigator and Mysterious Stranger Gunslinger I should get a combined Panache-Luck-Grit pool equal in size to 3x my Charisma mod, right?

If this is so, what would then taking a level of Kata Master Monk mean? Would I get to add my Charisma a 4th time, or would the Kata Master's Panache ability give me nothing?

I hope this doesn't seem redundant, but I've just not been able to make heads or tails of the rules text regarding this.

Cheers,
- Gears

I think it is burried somewhere in the ACG, but if you get a panache pool from two different sources, it does not increase the pool, but it might give you more ways to spend the panache and regain it (look at that one ranger archetype in the ACG).

As is you are already triplle dipping, and while it is completely legal, the fact that using sleuth investigator, you can essentially never run out of them... is is pretty broken, and I would not be surprised to learn, that this will not survive the errata.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would not be adverse to a free rebuild per character per season, so people can make use of recent releases and keep a level playing field.
Maybe add a token cost like 5 PP.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
N N 959 wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:


My point was, that expecting it to require an unwritten spell is unreasonable, and the bashing shield enhancement pretty much turns your shield into a weapon (and from the...

I still don't understand what you're saying about an "unwritten spell"? You're suggesting that if Lead Blades was available then they would have used that spell instead of Bull's Strength?

If so, then I'll counter and say that they would have explicitly stated that Lead Blades does not work with anything that increases the size of the weapon. You know, like they did with the Keen property and Improved Critical? They know how to stop convergent stacking, even when it comes from two completely different sources. Interesting that the bashing rules don't explicitly rule out spikes, isn't it?

Is it possible they missed Lead Blades and Bashing and shield spikes? Sure. It's also possible when they used the "actually are," they were just going with what best described the mechanic without intending any stacking consequences. Similar to how many spells use "as if" the subject had concealment when the spell is not actually granting concealment, just wanting to use the same mathematical process.

Looking at the spell requirements is often a tactic employed to divine of two different effects are supposed to stack or not. Given that bull strength doesn't seem to be particularly linked to the bashing effect, I would argue, that yes lead blades would have been the right call, had it been available.

The keen weapon example... doesn't work for me. I actually remember the time in D&D when it went from stacking, to no longer stacking, to some designers still arguing that is should stack... that process to years. If I have to start listing the number of unclear rules in the PFRPG, I will quite likely not be done before PF2 hits the store shelves.. so let's not.

Shield spikes don't really enter into the discussion, since bashing is an armor enhancement, and shield spikes require a weapon enhancement bonus. So you could have a +2 bashing shield with +1 flaming shield spikes - this gives you the option to attack for 1d8 +2 or 1d6+ 1+1d6 fire damage.

And frankly, I would rather attack with a real weapon.

EDIT: The casting lead blades argument is valid at lower levels, once your reach a certan level you can pretty much guarantee the presence of min/level buffs.

Also as written, I think lead blades does stack with shield spikes, not that this was ever questioned.

I really don't have a problem with the concept, but some things just don't work as written.

EDIT2: Flame oracle cheese is a result of game designers writing a nice fitting ability without realizing the ways it can be abused. See Goz masks.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ARGH! wrote:
Go druid with the growth domain and swift action enlarge person, use a large size club in two hands and you are up to 4d6, as the club starts out large (1d8), goes up 2d6 with enlarge person as huge, and Shillelagh to 4d6, all at first level for a standard and a swift action.

I know it is possible, but frankly I don't really want to. That kind of damage is pretty dangerous, especially when confusion and similar effects become relevant.

I might (ab)use Shillelagh with a new Hunter/magus with a club and enlarge person (enlarge person mostly to avoid attacks of opportunity at lower levels. )

N N 959 wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Yeah, pretty weird, that a magic shield enhancement from the CRB doesn' require a spell from the APG that will not be written for several years.

Not following your logic. Lead Blades is a weapon enhancement, not a shield enhancement.

Quote:
If someone tells me, that that means that my hunter with her 0 GP club and two min/level spells can deal 3d6 ... well that is a bit unreasonable.

I love these subjective statements passed off as some objective truth. There are hundreds of things in this game that are "unreasonable" depending on who you ask. I find it funny when people zero in on one particular thing and pretend this is some huge game breaking ordeal.

By the time/level you can get a Shield of Bashing, doing 3d6 is nothing considering it's going to cost you a casting of Lead Blades and some feat investment. At 4th level, my Rage Power Attacking THW Barbarian is getting +16 on damage with a +1 weapon. And he doesn't need to cast a spell to do it. That's more damage on bonus than this weapon is doing out right. Of things that are unreasonable in this game, this doesn't break the top 100, probably not even the top 200.

My point was, that expecting it to require an unwritten spell is unreasonable, and the bashing shield enhancement pretty much turns your shield into a weapon (and from the description pretty much does the same as lead blades, increasing the kinetic potency).

I am not going to argue that the bashing shield things is terribly broken, especially considering the two weapon fighting penalties.

However that is not the issue, the reason why we have a general rule against stacking, is to curb the power of some of the better combinations. I am not going to argue, that a level Barbarian can do that much damage, but that is pretty much his thing.

Oh and lead blades is a personal range spell, thus it affects all weapons used by the character.

Just for the sake or argument, two-weapon fighting builds with shields only really get good once characters get a substantial bonus on damage rolls, and even then I would prefer to flurry.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If it is for an adventure path, the PFS board might not be the best play to ask.

That said, sneak attack is a trap option, but if you want to have fun with shuriken:

already buffed with divine favor and deadly aim:

Shuriken lover
Half-elf brawler 2/warpriest of Irori 1 (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide 23, 60, Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat 59)
LN Medium humanoid (elf, human)
Init +2; Senses low-light vision; Perception +4
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 12, touch 12, flat-footed 10 (+2 Dex)
hp 26 (3 HD; 1d8+2d10+6)
Fort +7, Ref +5, Will +4; +2 vs. enchantments
Immune sleep
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee gauntlet (from armor) +7 (1d3+5) or
. . gauntlet (from armor) flurry of blows +5/+5 (1d3+5) or
. . unarmed strike +7 (1d6+5) or
. . unarmed strike flurry of blows +5/+5 (1d6+5)
Ranged or
. . shuriken flurry of blows +4/+4 (1d6+5) or
. . shuriken +6 (1d6+5)
Special Attacks blessings 3/day, brawler's flurry, martial flexibility 4/day, sacred weapon (1d6, 1 rounds/day)
Warpriest Spells Prepared (CL 1st; concentration +3)
. . 1st—divine favor, magic weapon
. . 0 (at will)—detect magic, light, mending
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 16, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 10
Base Atk +2; CMB +8; CMD 17
Feats Deadly Aim, Improved Unarmed Strike, Point-blank Shot, Precise Shot, Weapon Focus (shuriken)
Traits armor expert, fate's favored
Skills Perception +4; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception
Languages Common, Elven
SQ blessings (rune: blast rune, spell-storing weapon, strength: stength of will, strength surge), brawler's cunning, elf blood, martial training
Other Gear four-mirror, shuriken (5), 104 gp
--------------------
Tracked Resources
--------------------
Blessings (3/day) (Su) - 0/3
Martial Flexibility (move action, 4/day) (Ex) - 0/4
Sacred Weapon (1 rounds/day) (Su) - 0/1
Shuriken - 0/5
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Armor Expert -1 Armor check penalty.
Blessings (3/day) (Su) Pool of power used to activate Blessing abilities.
Brawler's Flurry +0/+0 (Ex) Can make full attack & gain two-wep fighting, but only with unarmed strike, close, or monk wep.
Deadly Aim -1/+2 Trade a penalty to ranged attacks for a bonus to ranged damage.
Elf Blood Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Fate's Favored Increase luck bonuses by 1.
Improved Unarmed Strike Unarmed strikes don't cause attacks of opportunity, and can be lethal.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Martial Flexibility (move action, 4/day) (Ex) As a Move action, gain a combat feat for 1 min. More gained for greater actions.
Point-Blank Shot +1 to attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at up to 30 feet.
Precise Shot You don't get -4 to hit when shooting or throwing into melee.
Sacred Weapon (1 rounds/day) (Su) As a swift action, grant weapon enhancement bonus or certain powers.

Hero Lab and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

We really need more details, as the others have mentioned nearly everything is somehow possible.

Sneak attacking grappler - check
Strangling people with your hair - check
Hitting people with mithral waffle irons - check
Killing this with a spoon - check (see magus class for details)
Shoot arrows to hit touch AC - check (and damn good)
Hexing people with unarmed strikes - check
non-lawful monk without supernatural stuff - check

--

You could always try just to break the RP mold, like playing a two weapon fighting, lightly armored paladin (who isn't a party pooper - I suggest Shelyn ^^).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Fomsie wrote:
Considering that Mithral armor still requires the initial armor category usage feat, I am going to assume that "limitations" applies only to drawbacks such as penalties to class abilities that state they only function in certain types of armor. I don't think it actually qualifies the armor as being the lighter category for enhancement purposes.

Actually this is a good point, something like the

Agile wrote:

Aura moderate transmutation CL 7th

Slot none; Price +1 bonus; Weight —
Description
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. The agile weapon enhancement can only be placed on melee weapons that are usable with the Weapon Finesse feat.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, cat’s grace; Price —.

as written will not work on a katana or similar weapon even if the user is a Swashbuckler and has slashing grace.

However in this case we only have to look at the interaction of items and not class features.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah, this really isn't a PFS specific question.

Looking at the brawler class (the armor enhancement is obviously intended for them, and maybe Sohei monks) they can wear mithral breastplate since it counts as light armor for their AC bonus (just like it counts for other things like a low level magus/summoner/bard in mithral breastplate being able to cast ).

Since this can be part of the natural progression for the class it is intended to work for, I am inclined to allow it.

That said, expect table variation, since brawlers can do a lot of things that will surprise GMs, my Paladin is going to dip into brawler to be able to flurry with a temple sword, while wearing a shield and a breastplate.

It is not broken, unless you consider the base enhancment broken, and considering stat allocations, chances are pretty much 95 & that such a brawler will not be able to fully benefit from the higher DEX bonus to AC.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ughbash wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Move: Obviously I have a pretty high BAB, since have quite often retrieved my phone from my jacket or pants pocket without stopping moving. While you walk somewhere and have re required number of hands, why not, unless you have to interact with a container like a scroll case (with more than one scroll in it).

Not that hard considering you were walking (which is a move action). That means you still had a standard action to do that during those 6 seconds.

If you double moved call it a hustle or a jog, it might have been more dificult and thus would have required a Bab of 1+.

I was rather assuming that I was using my standard action to mess with my phone. But yeah the example is difficult, because of the abstract nature of combat movement, initiative and action economy.

That said, I have done so while jogging, admittedly usually one the treadmill in the fitness studio I frequent. Of course I assume that my characters are a good deal tougher and better at a lot of things than me^^

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well considering that drawing a huge sword from a sheath on your back, does not provoke an attack of opportunity and can pretty much always be done as a move action, realism left the building some time ago. So that argument really should not bother us too much.

-

Then lets look at staffs, rods and wands. Staffs quite often can be used as quarterstaff, and in the cases where it is not case, the reason seems to be more fluff based than based on a mechanical advantage.
I have serious reservations regarding GMs asking for intent, and penalizing players based on that intent.

There should be no mechanical difference between a character drawing his +1 quarterstaff with the intent to hit someone (if only to get the benefit of combat expertise) and a character drawing a staff to obliterate her enemies with the power of the fire spirits.

The same should be true for rods (at the very least those that can be used as proper weapons, but then again there should be little appreciable difference, and retrieving it from something like your belt or a sheath should pose no problems.

Wands are specially called out in the original documentation, but compare quite well to daggers, and some of the blunt monk weapons.
Obviously since even using a wand does not provoke an attack of opportunity, I would argue that it is fair game.

I am not entirely happy, that we don't have and item like a wand bracer - and while the spring loaded wrist sheath currently serves to give easy access to usually no more than 2 wands, is uses a swift action, and seems so good and under priced to be almost mandatory.

-

The quick draw feat is similar, but covers a different area, and no one actually asks to let characters draw things like potions as a free action.

-

This really question really only applies to characters taking a move a action, and considering the number of move actions on page 183 of the CRB, in some cases there should be no added problem (remember that you can draw a weapon with any of these, if you have the BAB, that fact is not currently under discussion):

Move: Obviously I have a pretty high BAB, since have quite often retrieved my phone from my jacket or pants pocket without stopping moving. While you walk somewhere and have re required number of hands, why not, unless you have to interact with a container like a scroll case (with more than one scroll in it).

--

I thin the really relevant part of the rules consists of:

quote wrote:

Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects [b] carried in easy reach, such as wands./b] If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item. If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one.

If a character e.g wears a bandolier or a bandoleer like the adventurers sash, with a loop tho secure their wands, I would call that sufficiently easy access. Of course this means that those items are also prime target for certain combat maneuvers, namely dirty trick, sunder and steal.

That seems like a fare exchange.

Also I would like to add the following item to this discussion:

Efficient Quiver wrote:

Efficient Quiver
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 9th

Slot —; Price 1,800 gp; Weight 2 lbs.

Description
This appears to be a typical arrow container capable of holding about 20 arrows. It has three distinct portions, each with a nondimensional space allowing it to store far more than would normally be possible.

The first and smallest one can contain up to 60 objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow. The second slightly longer compartment holds up to 18 objects of the same general size and shape As a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as 6 objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staffs, or the like). Once the owner has filled it, the quiver can quickly produce any item she wishes that is within the quiver, as if from a regular quiver or scabbard. The efficient quiver weighs the same no matter what's placed inside it.

Construction Requirements
Craft Wondrous Item, secret chest; Cost 900 gp

While it should not be required, this would deal with the argument of drawing something from a sheath. However, not unlike the gloves of storing, this item is also priced as an extra dimensional container.

--

Regarding ammunition and shuriken, I just want to point out that I can flurry and throw a pretty high number of tangleshot shuriken per round ... so moving while drawing a proper tanglefoot bag and throwing it doesn't seem unreasonable.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
GM Aram Zey wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
This resolution is preferable to the AR deviation. I'm content. :)

I sometimes wonder whether you started this whole thread just to remove early access altogether. You certainly achieved it.

Status quo was fine till you rocked the boat.

I think, that blaming Jiggy is a bit unreasonable here, it was a pathfinder rules team decision.

The old ruling had a number of problems, especially considering that we already had people with and without early access in the campaign.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Deussu wrote:

I for one saw the previous FAQ entry inconsistent and unreasonable. It allowed characters with no real spellcasting abilities to enter prestige classes that granted spell casting progression. As a mental exercise imagine an aasimar fighter 1/eldritch knight 10. It would have been legal, but absolutely ridiculous and inconsistent.

After pondering this a bit, I must admit stating a certain date when this new FAQ clarification would come to power in PFS would have been fair. I do, however, understand the Pathfinder Society team's disdain for a sudden surge of grandfathering attempts, like when aasimars and tieflings were disallowed after the start of Season 6. Grandfathering early entry prestige class characters would have been much harder, though.

While the above class really has been unreasonably bad without early access, that aasimar fighter would need a level in an existing arcane spellcasting class.

But yeah the old ruling was a band aid on the issue, and those classes have not been decent for quite some time.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
N N 959 wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
It seems to be a result of the similar abilities don't stack rule. Just like the lead blades spell, does not stack with the impact weapon enhancement, since they are essentially doing the same thing.

The Impact weapon quality actually uses Lead Blades as the underlying spell. Bashing uses Bull's Strength. Qualitatively, completely different effects.

I take it there is no FAQ which states that these two don't stack and it's just people's opinion?

Yeah, pretty weird, that a magic shield enhancement from the CRB doesn' require a spell from the APG that will not be written for several years.

Also since Tamec was so kind to post the relevant sections of two spells, let me add another:

Shillelag: Your own non-magical club or quarterstaff becomes a weapon with a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. A quarterstaff gains this enhancement for both ends of the weapon. It deals damage as if it were two size categories larger (a Small club or quarterstaff so transmuted deals 1d8 points of damage, a Medium 2d6, and a Large 3d6), +1 for its enhancement bonus.

If someone tells me, that that means that my hunter with her 0 GP club and two min/level spells can deal 3d6 ... well that is a bit unreasonable. You can still get that damage, but Mr. Wizard has to bother casting enlarge person on you.

1 to 50 of 1,736 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.