I've always kind of had a problem with defining when the AC can "Defend" a PC. How does the animal know when to defend you and when it's not an attack. If you have your AC on "defend" (which makes sense to me)
Since real world police dogs without mystical links, room temperature IQ's, and the ability to speak with their owners make that distinction all the time, I'd imagine they decide if their owner is being attacked the same way anyone else does.
A family member trains his g. shepards in schutzhund and it is incredibly silly to think that a trained guard dog would not immediately attack any perceived threat to itself or its master. The dogs have been trained to not wait for a command to do their job, in fact, thats mostly what their job is, to defend against/attack anything that may threaten their space. If you don't want your attack animal to attack things, that is what the leash or fence or whatever else is for, to stop them from killing all sorts of things the trainer doesn't want them to kill when the master isn't right there to stop it from doing so. If a bear, dragon, or humanoid unknown to said AC approaches and initiative is rolled, that AC should automatically act to defend itself and its master (initiative shouldnt even need to be rolled for this to happen)... it's often on the trainer/master to stop them from attacking, not the other way around. If it is truly just a guard animal, it very well may just alert, and not attack, but if it has been trained to be aggressive towards perceived threats that cross the ACs threshold of "too close to me or my master" it shouldn't need any handling for it to bite, claw, or do whatever else it does. This would seem to me to be common sense... you don't buy a guard dog expecting it to sit and look pretty until you let it know something is afoot... it lets you know something is afoot, and you need to let it know to chill and look pretty if you don't agree.
Secondly, the idea of an attack dog not attacking undead, or a construct or something... Well trained guard dogs will attack all sorts of stuff that they see as a threat, living or not. Covered in flesh or made of metal, it doesn't really matter. If they think cars are a threat, they will bite cars... if they think trees are a threat, they will bite trees, and I personally haven't met many dogs that didn't find weeks or months old rotting flesh to be anything but a great snack lol.
If you don't try to be merciful by taking something captive, you can avoid this whole silly quagmire of "is or isnt it evil if".
As a paladin, ping for Evil.. if it is Evil, and I mean Evil in the games definition, then you as a paladin may smite away without regret, as that Evil entity has done things so terrible as to have the universe label him or her as a "bad person". No remorse, no silly arguments about falling. Kill the slaver, kill the Evil king of Cheliax, and kill every other evil creature you find... if you are good enough at it, you may just create world peace!
Paladin: So I'm sitting in this bar, right? Not drinking of course... that, as all of you know, is against my code... and this BALOR walks in, right?!
Group: *Stares blankly*
Paladin: So, he sits down all normal like and orders a drink. Now, you know me, and Erastil be damned if I would normally let something like this happen, but I didn't even know what to do! I just sat there and stared!
Group: *looks slightly bored*
Paladin: So he turns to me, right? And I say... "Hey, take a wrong turn friend?" And he says "BSDG L:KJETW AD DFHJLTJKEW WRVDS" in this booming voic- no, JUST LIKE THAT, I'm serious! Couldn't understand a bloody thing he way saying! Turns out, he just had his WISDOM TEETH REMOVED!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!
Group: *collective sigh of disapproval, begins to disperse*
Paladin: JUST KIDDING! I attacked him on sight, and was obviously out matched, so I ran back to you guys for help... may want to ready weapons!
At this point I think it reasonable to just flag his posts for breaking the "most important rule: Don't be a jerk" ... You have been continually combative and provocative for its own sake. If someone were to say " I really believe it works this way, and while all of you disagree, I would like to FAQ it." I would be happy to acquiesce. You have done the opposite, and therefore see the result.
2nd and 3rd level shouldn't be rare at all for an NPC who is employed for a good portion of their life. Maybe the town drunk and and village fool and the extraordinarily lazy have little chance of surpassing 1st level, but a busy smith or merchant would during their life time. It is not so great an accomplishment to gain an extra hit die and a few skill points.
Are you kidding me? The town drunk should hit lvl 8 inside a month.... what with the near constant cr 1 and 2 trap encounters he has to overcome getting from one bar stool to the next... or, god forbid, having to cross the street to the other bar!!
If you cant hit a dc 10 to know the skeleton has DR, you probably arent guessing that the thing rising from a crypt in rags is a ghoul, you are probably saying "@%#&! Another skeleton guy, but this time hes wearing the latest fashion!"
In other words, witbout a successful roll or an explaination from a party member who has the knowledge, your character would most likely assume the obviously undead thing with lots of bones showing is probably simialr to the last undead thing with bones showing. You would probably be equating most all undead you come across to be the same until you had some experience that proved otherwise.
"Well, that slow moving skeleton guy with nasty flesh seemed to not care as much about my hammer as the last one... can anyone explain?"
When faced with a lack of knowledge (and no portable encyclopedia), people equate current situations with past experience.... it is how we work.
I love to hate unnecessarily, it makes for a great punch line, but in actual play it is wholly rediculous to carry it through to your players.... kill off gnomish npcs, or give the players cohorts to slaughter wholesale while they still gain some benefit to having them
What is most hilarious about the situation i think, is that the GM is perfectly ok with the cleric being forced to atone for an action he wants no part in. And he sees that as a perfectly acceptable solution? Friend or not, at that point i would just turn to him and tell him he was being a c***. Wouldn't want to continue playing with a group that had no respect for me anyways.
It sounds to me like your group sort of sucks, TBH. In the end, they have decided that a PCs NEW pet is more important than their healer and friend, and are willing to literally kill their friend because he will not stand for the pet.
That would make me walk from the table... I don't ever really suggest doing it, but in this case I don't really see a better solution, they are sort of pricks.
EDIT: I am still interested in how the ranger came upon this undead horse as an animal companion?
We just started playing it as an increase to the multiplier of the critical hit, keep rolling till you stop critting. With a 20+critical confirm+confirm add 1 multiplier, with 3 crits + confirm add x2 modifier... if any roll is a miss you don't confirm the last crit multiplier roll.
Paladin: "I'm a 12 yr old girl that eats puppies and steals whenever I get the chance!"
[Paladin powers leave the building]
Demon: "Hahaha you fool, your god cannot protect you now!"
Paladin: "I just didn't want him to have to witness what I am about to do to your corpse... I'll make good later."
[Strength checks/will saves to break free from bindings, fight to the death!!"]
The issue isn't if you can or cannot see, but if you are effectively Blind as per the prd condition... shutting your eyes does not make you blind per the condition, so does not negate mirror image.
Sorry, I used the words miss chance twice, but mirror image isn't a miss chance, it is a random roll to see what, if anything, you hit. Closing your eyes would "negate" displacement but give you a worse % chance in the mean time. There is never a time (that I can think of) in the rules where closing your eyes increases you chances to hit.
Edit: If someone can link a line from the core rulebook that states closing your eyes gives you the "Blind" condition I will immediately, yet begrudgingly, change my tune. Closing your eyes gives everyone full concealment from you, but that doesn't = Blind.
Before i get into this, i want to say that the group of players are all cool with one another, there are no hurt feelings and no one is upset or "wrong" for their actions in or out of character, we are all adults and are all happy to be playing pathfinder together. This is 99% in game, in character strife that is being discussed, and don't want anyone to be put down or told they are jerks etc for any in character decisions they made. At least one other person whom i play with visits these boards, and if he reads this, i think it would be pretty cool to have him tell his characters side of the story too.
Also, this takes place in an AP i won't mention, so I will be attempting to give away as little info as possible, some things may not come across quite right, but it is because i am making everything into vanilla yogurt so it won't spoil anything. On to it.
Background:
My character is a lvl 4 gnome life oracle with the deaf curse. He has been a blast to play, and i am very pleased with him. I built him from the ground up as a protector of friends and innocents, and made him CG. The whole time i have been playing him i feel as if i have harped about his protective side, and how he will often go out of his way to put himself in danger if he feels it will help others... he takes extra time to bury bodies when he feels it is right to do, and does everything he can (make the dm come up with non-lethal coup de gras rules on the spot!) to not kill unless he feels threatened, or feels others are being threatened. He definitely ~does~ kill, he has actually been pretty darn good at it, so don't get the wrong idea, he is not some pansy who always whines when something dies... anyways... this leads us to ~~
Situation:
We have been fighting through an area where everything is hostile... not a single creature has been even slightly willing to negotiate. Suddenly, a winged creature (WNPC) appears and gives the "don't kill me i just want to talk" sign. Others don't want to talk, but my character approaches, and WNPC asks for help. I say to the group we should do it, but another PC wants nothing to do with WNPC, and thinks WNPC is going to try and kill us ("nothing in this area hadn't up to this point", he says), lets call him Bob. We go along with it because it leads us to another NPC whom we would very much like to put down. Fast forward to the fight, we have killed the 2nd NPC, but during the fight, there was some confusion and WNPC fired upon a PC (rogue) who popped out of combat and approached WNPC mid fight (the fight was occurring a distance from WNPC). The Winged NPC went back and forth from doing nothing but moving 5-10 ft(very confusing), and firing at this PC who immediately began to attack it (as an aside, the rogue had also said ~OOC~ that he was "going to come back and kill this *****" the round he moved towards WNPC, which was the round before WNPC first fired at him, but it shouldn't... persay... matter because it was OOC, and it is still unclear if he would have actually done anything). When the 2nd NPC fell, Bob joined the frey as well as a barbarian on our side and went to town on WNPC, with WNPC firing back at Bob, or once again moving slightly without doing anything else. I motioned for WNPC to give up (threw hands in air in WNPC's direction and pleaded) but WNPC did not... so WNPC was cut down... here comes the issue.
WPNC fell to the ground, obviously down for the count (below 0 for sure, not sure if - con). Myself, and the ranger who did not participate in WNPCs demise b/c we both thought there was a misunderstanding ran to WNPC and attempted to stabilize. When this happened, Bob attempted to coup de gras WNPC while the ranger and i were over WNPCs body. I tried to stop him, rules did not allow, and there was much discussion over how to handle it. In the end, the DM did not allow a coup de gras, but did allow a normal attack, saying there wasn't a way for me to get in the way of the blow (which i stated i wanted to do if he was to swing), which was tantamount to a coup de gras at this point anyways, an effective 100% chance of death (could have rolled a 1)....
My character was shocked. As a protector, and having taken on that role for WNPC, he was devastated that he could not protect WNPC from his own party members, people whom he had previously, even in this current encounter, done so much for (healed Bob and the rogue for ... 40+? hps, much through life link, taking the gnome down to 20% health at one point), and whom he had trusted to have his back. He attempted in vain to hold her wounds together, even though she was certainly dead. After the party pretty much immediately stripped WNPC of items, my oracle dropped most of his worldly possessions, picked up WNPCs body, and walked away. The ranger protested to the rest of the party, but due to his "if it's alive i care, dead i don't" general attitude, he quickly abandoned such and went on with the rest of the group.
Spoilering the rest as they are my characters possible decisions, and if a group member does read this post, they can skip this part.
character decisions:
Personally, my character feels betrayed, and feels the final blow Bob landed was completely uncalled for, and a barbaric act, when WNPC was obviously helpless/done for anyways. Something my (deaf) oracle did not, and would never, say to the party is he also felt an immediate kinship to WNPC due to WNPC's somewhat similar deficiency... no one in the party picked up on this. Lastly, WNPC was attacking party members off and on, but was barely doing any damage... WNPC was, as far as we could tell, a near non-threat. Bob disagreed (ooc and in), saying if WNPC is hitting us, it is a fight to the death, but without knowing what the DM was doing/rolling, all I could go on was WNPC was not trying very hard to hurt anyone.
The idea is to take WNPC back to the caravan and try to have WNPC raised if not an outsider (my character doesn't know). If the raise is a possibility, but not at the caravan, I have to make the decision as to whether this character would continue to pursue a raise... if it goes any further than the caravan (asked the DM if a gentle repose + hiding of the body would be possible, and got a yes, so it doesn't persay have to), it means i put the character aside permanently and play another (which i don't mind doing in the least, i love my characters, but am happy to see one go and another come along).
My DM and group would be pretty much fine with this other than the loss of a dedicated healer, but IMO out of character that is something they should have thought of before they did something to go directly against my characters wishes that were made quite clear in game. That doesn't mean i am sore about the situation, quite the opposite, it was actually a really great scene as far as character interaction, just that the consequences also make a lot of sense to me.
If it doesn't go beyond the caravan, and the character sticks around, I am not sure how he would be ok working with someone whom he now sees as antithetical to his beliefs... Bob is saying he will be doing this to every single thing we fight, no mercy, no chance for redemption, etc etc. It is my characters belief that if Bob were to see WNPC alive again, even if unarmed and not being threatening in any way, he would do anything he could to put WNPC in the ground once more... is this someone he could ever trust?
There is also the very real possibility that WNPC is evil, and was just terrible in it's attempt at treachery. My character is fully aware of that, but feels like this intelligent being was not given the chance it deserved to make that apparent, and i'm not sure he could ever live with himself if he didn't find out?
Please, what do you guys think my character should do? It is a character decision, i know, there is no right or wrong answers, but would love some feedback. Thanks!
Maybe use the rules for in flight collision (dc 25? to stay aloft), if they make the check they don't suffer penalties, but if they fail they potentially take a lot of extra, unintended mind you, damage.
Being antagonistic while telling someone to build their character differently isn't all that helpful. Maybe the character he built with an 8 str has a physical malady? Maybe he is trying to min/max, or maybe XYZ. Instead of telling him he is doing it wrong, maybe try to help with the situation he is in.
"Look guys, I have been doing this a long time, and I mean a loooong time, and I think I know what the problem is........ ya'll are terrible. I mean really really terrible, not just a little bit, but don't worry, I have a solution! I'm going to get up. Then I'm going to walk over to the bathroom, and use it. By the time I get back, everything will have gotten better, as in, ya'll won't be nearly as terrible. If, for some insane reason that I cannot possibly fathom, you haven't gotten less terrible, ya'll need to leave." ~~~ Walk to the bathroom ~~~
Maybe they meant to leave open those vulnerabilities... I don't know and neither do you... to suggest that your interpretation means you aren't calling the developers morons would suggest those who disagree with you are doing such... which is pretty rude, and a childish way to have a discussion. I would suggest staying away from such statements in the future.
People often overlook the statement in ineffective weapons that specifically says most normal weapons, will not do damage to walls and other material. An adamantine longsword is great for sundering someone's gear, or even cutting a tree down, but it still sucks for working your way through a castle wall. On the other hand, an adamantine warhammer will probably get through that castle wall pretty quickly (depending on your stats), but it doesn't mean it will break sinuous or flexible material on a hit. And even though your adamantine warhammer is cool, a simple mining pick has the potential to get through a wall faster than the hammer, because it does 2x damage and bypasses hardness anyways (costs a lot less too).
In the overcoming hardness rules it specifically states that tools/weapons made to get through a material bypasses the materials hardness.... aka
A pick bypasses stones hardness
A saw or woodcutting axe bypasses woods hardness
Etc etc.
It also says that someof tools/weapons just wont do damage to certain materials no matter how hard you try...
A warhammer will not damage a rope, no matter how much extra damage you do.
Small note, if I remember correctly boots of speed do not have any continuous functions, only activated functions, and therefore would be unuseable while wildshaped. Spells continue to function on you, but magic items may not, mage armor vs bracers of armor is a great example (phone really wanted to change bracers to beavers... awkward!)
First attempt didnt post, here goes shortened post #2
A character who walks for more than 8 hours rolls a con check DC10 +1 per hour after the first check. Fail once = fatigued, fail again = exhausted.
1 hour of rest cures exhausted, 8 uninterrupted cures fatigued. As far as staying awake 2 days in a row, I'm not sure ><. Eagerly awaiting an answer myself, and shamelessly bump for one. :)
I have used the exertion rules for continuing to walk, but start after 24 hours. So DC10 at 24 hours, DC11 at 25, etc. For every hour rested over 8 the night before, I add +1 hour to the time they can stay awake... sleep for 12 hours, awake for 28 before checks.
Saying it's a remarkably silly statement only makes for an unfriendly atmosphere, and is pretty unnecessary especially when you follow that statement with "this info isn't defined in Paizo's books but..."
Past that, with what you linked I agree with you, and can admit when I'm wrong. Natural AC is always a bonus just as AC is always a bonus.
