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

Serisan's page

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,995 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 10 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,995 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
mplindustries wrote:

Slashing Grace actually affects any one-handed slashing weapon for which you have weapon focus, so, you can apply it to multiple weapons.

Slashing Grace wrote:

Prerequisites: Dex 13, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus with chosen weapon.

Benefit: Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon (such as the longsword).

Seems pretty clear to me that it only impacts a single weapon type for which you possess Weapon Focus.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Your offhand would need to be a scimitar, as well, since SG can only affect one weapon selection and can't be taken twice. Dual Slice is not required, nor should it be given that you'll be taking a -4 penalty to hit with both hands even with TWF.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Invulnerable Rager comes to mind as the obvious part. 1 level of Verminous Hunter will allow you to get fast healing 1 and light fortification all-day, every day if you kill the companion.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Until a FAQ, expect table variation. RAW does not adequately address this situation.

Regarding Unseat, the feat specifically is a free action added to an attack when charging while mounted and with a lance. That is hardly an exhaustive discussion of the options available.

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:


What happens in a situation where a player is willing to buy the material, but can't do so right now because a book is not available in his country? For example it can take quite a number of weeks between the addition of a book to the additional resources and it being available in Germany.

I have considered buying some 10 $ gift paizo.com gift cards, to sell to players, but is seemed a little bit shady.

I think this is a legitimate issue to discuss in regards to your original post. Is there difficulty with currency conversion when purchasing from paizo.com? As I'm in the US, I don't have any experience interacting with other currencies.

I could see a case being made for what you're asking if the ability to purchase the additional resource is restricted by the actual availability of the resource.

The conversion rate is changing, and in some cases credit card charges are a factor, this is mostly an issue since credit cards are much rarer in europe than in the US.

For example the exchange rate € to $ has risen from about 0,86 € cent per 1 $ to 0,95 € cent per 1 $ a couple of weeks ago ( and I remember a time where it was about 80 cent per dollar), seems like the american economy is recovering nicely. ^^

I think local availability can be a problem when a book is sold out, and paizo doesn't think it is financially viable to make a reprint, some of the old APs have that problem. And of course this can be a problem for players who can't switch to pdfs.

I suppose what I meant here is summed up like this: "Is it possible to purchase a PDF from Paizo using non-US Dollar currency?"

So, without going to a moneychanger of some sort, could you make a purchase of a PDF with Euros? My guess would be no given that Paizo likely is not large enough to absorb the cost of converting the cash into USD or to retain holdings in foreign currency.

If a player needs to go through the intermediary step of obtaining USD to purchase the pdfs, then it's reasonable to say that there should at least be a discussion of the policy. Until then, I really like your idea of having the Paizo gift cards available for players, honestly.

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:


What happens in a situation where a player is willing to buy the material, but can't do so right now because a book is not available in his country? For example it can take quite a number of weeks between the addition of a book to the additional resources and it being available in Germany.

I have considered buying some 10 $ gift paizo.com gift cards, to sell to players, but is seemed a little bit shady.

I think this is a legitimate issue to discuss in regards to your original post. Is there difficulty with currency conversion when purchasing from paizo.com? As I'm in the US, I don't have any experience interacting with other currencies.

I could see a case being made for what you're asking if the ability to purchase the additional resource is restricted by the actual availability of the resource.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

You explicitly can.

See this FAQ.

This is what I get for not checking the FAQ before posting.

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What you've proposed is the perfect case for having the iconics available for play. It allows players, especially entry-level players, to try things without making the purchase. I don't think it's wise, however, to allow players to build characters with resources they don't own for the simple fact that it increases the margin for error significantly, which leads to the bad kind of table variance, more audits, and potentially hurt feelings.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

I would wear medium armor, until you can afford Mithral Fullplate.

Go Ranger.

The way I read it, mithral does not bypass the Ranger's restriction on bonus feats from Combat Style.

Ranger Combat Style wrote:
The benefits of the ranger's chosen style feats apply only when he wears light, medium, or no armor. He loses all benefits of his combat style feats when wearing heavy armor.
Mithral wrote:
Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor's check penalty on all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
nate lange wrote:
I think that your best course of action depends on a lot of considerations (like point buy, what level you'll likely play to, and whether you'll go mythic or anything like that), but generally slayer is a great option... You can focus of strength and not worry much about Dex but still be able to get a ton of attacks (by choosing the ranger 2wf style), and studied target will offset 2wf penalties.

Core, yo. No slayers allowed.

I'm going to say either Paladin or Fighter. If you're planning to go TWF-ish, then Fighter. Paladin will allow you to be a defensive house with the ability to pour on damage on-demand. Fighter will allow you to have slightly more consistent damage via TWF. If you are going the TWF route, you're better off with two heavy shields than the more iconic look of shield + waraxe.

The main case against Ranger is that you cannot wear heavy armor without shutting off your bonus feats.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
mplindustries wrote:
Calth wrote:
I am still not a huge fan of the hunter. I mean, if you arent playing a primal hunter, which I think is significantly better than the base class, you are better off going with a sacred huntsmaster Inquisitor, which is basically a Hunter+. You trade, for the most part, early focus access, the third focus, and some mostly worthless nature flavored abilities for bane, a domain, better skill abilities, and a better spell list.
I disagree on the spell list. Early access to Ranger spells is what I consider the best seller for Hunter.

Stole the words right from my head.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think there's a case for flour outlining the target just fine.

Invisibility wrote:
Items dropped or put down by an invisible creature become visible; items picked up disappear if tucked into the clothing or pouches worn by the creature.

The item only disappears if they tuck it into a pouch, etc. The flour does not become invisible unless they recast.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DinosaursOnIce wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Divine Verminous Hunter with a dead pet is one of the most versatile PCs on the planet. If you actually want to use the pet, Primal is amazing. Feral will be better once the errata is official, but the blog post made it clear that everything was tentative.
Mind pointing to the blog post? I am most curious.

Bah, turns out it was just a regular post and not a blog post. That's probably why it took me so long to find it. :-p


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Divine Verminous Hunter with a dead pet is one of the most versatile PCs on the planet. If you actually want to use the pet, Primal is amazing. Feral will be better once the errata is official, but the blog post made it clear that everything was tentative.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Note that statements of developer intent are not PFS binding and you can expect table variation on whatever you think the rules mean. Until there is a blog post, FAQ, or errata (only the first of which is likely given the source book being a Player Companion), the text is the text and GMs will rule on it individually.

GSP explains the developer intent version of Kraken Throttle.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Inner Sea Gods wrote:
Though she allows resurrection, the Lady of Graves opposes undeath as a desecration of the memory of the flesh and a corruption of a soul’s path on its journey to her judgment.

If you're going Shadowdancer, I would recommend against using the shadow unless you can justify it in-character for a specific scenario. As a GM, I would expect you to dismiss it once it has served its purpose and, as such, deal with the relevant Fortitude save.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh snap, monks will just have to get Clear Spindles like the rest of us.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Enchant the Haramaki, then give it the broken condition.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

How many citizens will have both the Trapfinding class feature and the ability to make a 31 Perception check to find the magical trap? Moreover, if most of the citizens fail the check, but someone does find the trap, what is the likelihood that the affected citizens will think that this was terrible? After all, they're going to interpret it in the most favorable way possible because they're charmed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sniggevert wrote:
No...but you can use a Harakami or Silken Ceremonial armor as a base line "clothes" type item that is armor. It's also base AC +1.

It's worth noting that these two options have absolutely no drawbacks, even with non-proficiency.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dr. Johnny Fever wrote:
The class really deserves to have a 9 level spell list with this new reduced eidolon; I believe it would be very in line with the power levels of the other 9 level 3/4 BAB classes (shaman, cleric, druid, oracle).

I only want to focus on this statement as I haven't seen the book yet. Because the summoner is an arcane caster, keeping it at 3/4 BAB and moving to 9 levels of casting would be breaking the design rules.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blind Kobold wrote:


* Cross out the list of added feats from the archetype for the "Bonus Feat" archetype and legalize it from there.

I like this option a lot.

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blind Kobold wrote:

Well if its just an expanded repertoire of feats that are siege/vehicle related that could be preventing it from being legal, why not change it for legalization in PFS? It wouldn't be much different than an Alchemist losing out on the Brew Potion feat and it gets replaced with the Extra Bombs feat.

Like:

In addition to combat and grit feats, a buccaneer can select from the following general feats as her bonus feats:...

It already says almost exactly that.

Buccaneer archetype wrote:
Bonus Feat: In addition to combat and grit feats, a buccaneer can select from the following feats as her bonus feats:

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hrothdane wrote:
I assumed it was the bonus feat list of all-illegal feats. ather than give replacements for the whole list, management felt lazy that day and just disallowed the archetype.

It's not an exclusive list of feats, though. They're in addition to the standard combat and grit feats.

Let's blame Sea Legs at level 1. That's gotta be it. ;-)

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Playing at my FLGS, the typical attitude is only to audit items of concern. For example, my level 3 character was audited for the purchase of an adamantine weapon, which I had proper documentation for on-hand. Roughly a 3 second audit, honestly, and one of the other players even stood up for me on that ("He has practically no other gear"). Frankly, we spend so much time talking about our characters out-of-game that there's no particular need to audit most of the time.

That said, we also have 2 VOs at this store regularly and people who are regularly tapped to help new players with rules questions before/during/after sessions, so there's minimal concern. We help each other stay compliant.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Typically a 1 level dip in Cleric or Paladin.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The general rule, as Brf said, is that the creature should not provide XP for killing it. That said, if the party kills the Fiendish Boon critter and the Antipaladin runs away, they get full experience for defeating the Antipaladin encounter.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

IMO, the ban on illiterates is not so much a table disruption issue, but an in-game fluff rejection: the Pathfinder Society requires agents who can reliably report in the form of chronicles. They are an employer and, while there are certainly characters who are opportunistically there with low intelligence and no desire to read/write, these characters are able and can ostensibly handle that job duty.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

We have been rediscovered by the spambots.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Could always go the old fashioned way to get more speed. Nothing says speed quite like mounted flight.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Obbu wrote:

Slight monk/grapple noob here, but:

Currently even without kraken style entering the equation, you can coup de gras on the second round after a rapid+greater grapple using tie up?

(Move) Initiate Grapple
(Standard) Pin
(Swift) Tie Up

granted, that's two full rounds + grapple check + provoke on the coup, but isn't it in roughly the same ballpark?

If you use delay with another melee, you can do it same round, provided you eat the provoke, or stay out of threat.

Is this not allowed?

You've got your move and standard swapped, but yes that's legal. Alternatively, if you have Greater Grapple only, you can standard to initiate, move to tie up with a -10 penalty on the check.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you're concerned about movement speed, are you willing to take the Travel domain via any of its available options? How about a level in Barbarian or Bloodrager? Flame Oracle for Cinder Dance?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Thomas Graham wrote:

A +1 haramaki (or Silken Ceremonial Armor) is cheaper (by lots) than bracers and eventually you get up to something like +3 haramaki an folks don't have to worry about being caught out without mage armor or a dispel magic being left out.

My wizard (admixture 12/PF Agent 1) has +3 Glamered Silken Armor to do just that. Mage Armor (and bullet shield, and the rest) are good.. but sometimes you have to have something in reserve.

And beside.. Glamored means she's never out of costume. :D

Stole the words right from my head.

Does that make me a goblin now?

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just wanted to see if anyone had written up a briefing for level 8 and beyond at this point. If not, I'll post what I prep for level 8 in 2 weeks.

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So far, here's the results from my tables:

1: 4-6 hours, dependent on party races
2: 5 hours
3: 4 hours
4: 30 min-4 hours
5: Data unreliable. My players broke the scenario.
6: 4 hours
7: 2-3 hours (seriously, this level was disappointingly short.)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Otherwhere wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
Otherwhere, why do you recommend Chokehold? Unless you have some way of preventing an enemy from holding their breath, the only practical benefit of Chokehold is preventing speech. Preventing speech is useful if shutting down casters is absolutely a top priority for you, or if you're trying to take down sentries without raising an alarm, but those seem pretty circumstantial to me. It simply takes too long (10+ rounds) for a person to run out of breath and actually suffer the effects of suffocation.

For exactly the "silence my foe" aspect, not for the excruciatingly long choke.

The Kraken Throttle debate is over. It is merely another chokehold. (The foe gets to hold their breath before the suffocation begins.)

For PFS, a statement of developer intent is non-binding. A FAQ, errata or blog post needs to be made in order for the statement of developer intent to matter. Thus, it's left to "expect table variance."

A RAW reading of the feat does not support the developer intent, however. Moreover, errata and FAQs are extremely infrequent for the Player Companion line. There isn't even an area for FAQs for that product line. As such, it would be down to a clarifying blog post.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

GSP explains Kraken Style.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
DrSwordopolis wrote:
DualJay wrote:

I'm not 100% sure, but isn't there a normally terrible feat or ability or something that lets you knock the air out of someone and make the spend a load of their rounds of breath by hitting them?

I may be thinking of some 3.5 material. IDK.

Yep. Breathtaker, from People of the River.

It's still terrible, even with Kraken Style. Less terrible, admittedly, but you're still looking at 4 or 5 rounds of grappling before getting to con checks.

Actually...no it's not.

A 1st level Barbarian probably has 22 Str while raging. 24 by 6th.

Call that 2 attacks, -14 rounds of breath.

Is a grappling barbarian making melee attacks when maintaining a grapple chokehold via Kraken Throttle? The answer is "expect table variation."

Is the barbarian assisting a monk who is choking the target by making melee attacks against the target? If so, then I would expect the attacks to do much, MUCH more than the chokehold will.

Two words: Rapid Grappler.

Move action maintain, Swift and Standard attack.

Granted, it's not GREAT, but it's at least USABLE.

That's a long time to wait for that feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DrSwordopolis wrote:

Serisan, against a caster, sure, they're almost out of breath at that point, but a grappled caster is a dead caster anyway. Against a martial type, then you're still probably only halfway there after a round.

If you're succeeding in at least three successive grapple checks, then grapple/pin/tie up is probably going to be a better option than grapple/choke/choke/fort save vs unconsciousness/repeat until unconscious.

And that's assuming you either have a friendly barbarian full attacking your grappled target (in which case damage is probably going to kill it before it reaches its fort save range) or you yourself are raging and using greater grapple to perform a couple of successful grapples (or other attacks) against the target.

Edit: Ninjaed!

Exactly my point. I'm glad that dev intent is not PFS-binding outside of a FAQ or blog post, honestly, because dev intent in this case turned something novel and interesting into something terrible. I mean, nobody was going to take the 3rd feat in the chain (lol hardness), but at least 2 feats in the style were good enough to consider when put together.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
DrSwordopolis wrote:
DualJay wrote:

I'm not 100% sure, but isn't there a normally terrible feat or ability or something that lets you knock the air out of someone and make the spend a load of their rounds of breath by hitting them?

I may be thinking of some 3.5 material. IDK.

Yep. Breathtaker, from People of the River.

It's still terrible, even with Kraken Style. Less terrible, admittedly, but you're still looking at 4 or 5 rounds of grappling before getting to con checks.

Actually...no it's not.

A 1st level Barbarian probably has 22 Str while raging. 24 by 6th.

Call that 2 attacks, -14 rounds of breath.

Is a grappling barbarian making melee attacks when maintaining a grapple chokehold via Kraken Throttle? The answer is "expect table variation."

Is the barbarian assisting a monk who is choking the target by making melee attacks against the target? If so, then I would expect the attacks to do much, MUCH more than the chokehold will.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So, here's my problem: the way the game is designed, things are exceedingly generous on resistance to the mundane to prevent people from drowning, etc., but completely ridiculous when it comes to anything magical.

The fact that you have to roll to maintain a grapple turn over turn? No basis in reality. Maintaining a grapple IRL is simple if you can prevent your opponent from escaping. The fact that there is, according to the dev intent, no way to choke someone out in 6 seconds? Ditto. Literally anyone can learn how to do it and I know children who have done it. Note that 8 year olds should probably not be taught how to choke kids out because they'll use it over petty things. Not even kidding.

The part where it really becomes a problem for me is that, as written, a spellcaster can be deemed to still be "holding their breath" while casting a spell if they're able to make the concentration check. That's some magical breathing techniques there, with no basis in reality again, but I can easily see some rules lawyer (not unlike myself, really) saying that all it does is reduce the number of rounds by 1 because it's a standard action.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Serisan wrote:
If you could please clarify which part of the suffocation rules are intended to be invoked, that would be appreciated. Specifically, does the target have the opportunity to hold their breath?
You cut off their air. They get to hold their breath, 2 rounds per point of Constitution, -1 if they take a standard or full-round action.
I see. That pretty much makes this feat worthless.
Or just a middle of the road feat for grapplers instead of an insta-kill feat.

Would you take 2 feats for WIS+2 damage during a grapple?

On a 10 CON target, the choke will offer 20 attempts to escape, essentially: 10 from you, 10 from the grappled target (or 20 from you, if they opt not to struggle and lose air). If you can only fail to maintain on a 1 and the target can only succeed on an escape on a 20, that's still only a 36% chance of holding the grapple until they get to their CON checks, which is still at least 1 minute out. If the target has a CON of 13? Now we're down to 26%. CON 15 is down to 21%.

If the failure to maintain happens on 1-2 and the escape happens on 19-20, a 10 CON opponent will hit their CON checks 12% of the time. You are quite literally more likely to kill them with the damage than the choking.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Serisan wrote:
If you could please clarify which part of the suffocation rules are intended to be invoked, that would be appreciated. Specifically, does the target have the opportunity to hold their breath?
You cut off their air. They get to hold their breath, 2 rounds per point of Constitution, -1 if they take a standard or full-round action.

I see. That pretty much makes this feat worthless.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Since there's a process for official FAQs that goes with highest priority first, and as far as I can tell only a few folks have hit a FAQ request on this even, this is not an official FAQ. It is a declaration of intent of one of book's the two developers.

Kraken Throttle should be read to cutting off air from the target, and thus activating the "Suffocation" rules on 445. Yes, as written one could claim that since it uses the word "suffocate" it actually refers the very last step of that process "In the third round, she suffocates." No, that's not what is intended. Since most people agree it doesn't mean "make two checks (in the same round if you have Greater Grapple) and you kill anyone," I'm hope it's not a surprise that it was never intended to mean "make two checks (in the same round if you have Greater Grapple) and you KO anyone, and kill them 1 round later."

The main utility of the feat is that it adds 2 hp to the damage dealt by Kraken Style. This is the same size boost as Weapon Specialization, and enough to make the feat useful in the builds it's designed for even without the ability to choke someone to death over a couple of minutes. It certainly doesn't need to become the first 1-round-kill-no-save-feat in order to have fair utility.

Also, if you have questions about a Player Companion rule, I'll see it sooner if it's in that product's thread. I do scan the rest of the forums, but I can;t get to every thread every day. :)

If you could please clarify which part of the suffocation rules are intended to be invoked, that would be appreciated. Specifically, does the target have the opportunity to hold their breath?

*

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My interpretation of the word "must" in this context is that you cannot use the original roll if it was higher, not that it prevents you from using further abilities to generate rerolls. I can certainly understand where the more conservative interpretation comes from, though, and would caution ETV to players.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Entryhazard wrote:

Do you want the maximum cheese?

Artful dodge as written says that you can use Int in place for Dex for feats that require a minimum Dex, but it does not say that counts only for the prerequisite itself, so you can use Int in every place the feat says Dex as long as the feat itself has a minimum Dex prerequisite.

Artful Dodge + Weapon Finesse + Slashing/Fencing Grace = BAM INT TO HIT AND DAMAGE

I, for one, welcome my new Int-based Magi overlords

From rules lawyer to rules lawyer, I just want to say that this is a willful misinterpretation. :-p


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Malag wrote:

@DrakeRoberts

The way I see it is this. You (a player) declare what and how you do it to NPC or monster. Then I (a GM) decide if what condition it gets. You don't get to choose condition. GM arbitrates it completely. In some cases, I might mention that such trick isn't possible (because NPC doesn't have any pants on), but that seems about it. This is why, there is no "fluff" in ability description. Every part of text is mechanical explanation.

A player can very reasonably state what they're intending to do with the action, but yes, the GM can shoot you down on the pantsing if the target is wearing a onesie or something. Similarly, if something has no eyes (like a skeleton, perhaps) or too many eyes (like a gibbering mouther), you could say the "sand in the eyes" option will not work.

The GM should inform the player of this before allowing the player to take that action, though, unless it would be reasonable to require a knowledge check to know it first.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
draxar wrote:

In PFS the ruling is apparently no, you can never stack on a Demoralise shaken condition, the best you can do is extend it:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2jsox&page=10?Pathfinder-Society-Rules-20-F AQ#491

But I don't know how much people apply the rulings from that to wider gaming. It's the only ruling I could find when googling to see if I could stack the Shaken from Frightful Presence atop Demoralise.

Never trust Josh Frost, the man of Raging Skeletons. Morale bonus what?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey guys, remember how I said I re-read the text and retracted the silly longbow discussion? That's because it actually says this:

UE wrote:
You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size.

"At least" breaks the silliness.

1 to 50 of 1,995 << 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.