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

Talonhawke's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 4,369 posts (4,476 including aliases). No reviews. 3 lists. 1 wishlist. 6 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,369 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Also to go further how bad of a consequence of failure denotes one significant enough to remove T10?

I mean in the case of falling how many average HP does it take to be distracting? Any? 10%? 50%? What if I have feather fall available does that change my ability?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll try this in this thread. For those opposed to T10 either based off of the failure is distracting clause or the unknown imminent threat belief please list some skill uses that could actually come up in game where Take 10 rules could in fact be used if you were the GM.


Sounds good.

One other question, when trading in bonuses from Personal Weapon and such for numen, the +1 is set at 6,000. I'm assuming that you have to keep at least +1 on the weapon so your trading in the second +1 which would be about 6,000.


First Session will be this weekend hopefully. The Ranger is now going draconic sorcerer so we rounded out pretty well.


Dragon Bloodline Sorcerer's have their eldritch blast become a breath weapon which allows them to take meta-breath feats. So I have 2 questions

1. Does being a breath weapon give it a recharge timer? If yes no then I assume it still has to recharge between meta-breath uses.

2. Are meta-breath feats available to the Sorcerer as bloodline bonus feats, and if not would it be game breaking to let them be?


Sadie love these use them constantly as my go to sheet.

One question that might have been asked already any chance of Path or war showing up in the future?


I believe its because of the extra gain that could be had from and increased mental stat for a caster. Notice that moral training is the same way. It could also be because it is easier to train the body than the mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Your GM mileage may vary I would allow you to use it with a leg.


You have entered the realm of metaphysical "Hands". Kicking has nothing to do with hands, however attacks per round are limited by "hands". This is why you can't Swing a greatsword and then kick or headbutt as a TWF attack.


Well from where I stand I wouldn't let the crossbow guy do it either from a standpoint that you need two hands to reload the crossbow. Which I interpret to be using both of your "hands" for these purposes.


BBT I honestly hopes it gets a good in-depth FAQ and I hope the title quotes you with something like "But HANDS!!!"


Also the incremental wound rules seem kinda suspicious. *Starts making more tinfoil helmets.*


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope to do weekly writes up and i'm going to see about getting them to write journals up each session. Part of what I want to do with this is provide a finished write up that keeps the source feel while providing tips for anyone else wanting to use it for working the higher ups to have a better understanding of how their party works.


He is leaning towards warrior since he is going battle mystery. So he has a closer to full BAB. He is grabbing evocation spells when he can but yes overall that's been one of my fears. The ranger might end up going druid or sorcerer after i brought that up to him.


Main thing I'm wondering if anyone has time to look it over and i can post groupings if need is how they think these guys might size up with a group of 4.

We have a level 6 Troll born, a level 4 Amberite Incarnate, a level 6 Half-elf Finesse Rogue, and a level 6 Crossbow focused goblin Ranger.

I know without full details on the builds it could be hard just don't want to overwhelm or underwhelm them.


Thanks again guys.


Command Word Activated: 900 x spell level x
caster level. If limited (4 or fewer) uses per day,
multiply cost by (1/uses per day).

How does calculating uses per day work out it seems like 4 uses would be cheaper than 2 if I am reading it right.


Another Suggestion if one wants hits to matter in the long run more than a couple points of penalty from unchained, would be to look at Star Wars Sagas condition track and find a way to possible use it.


So an Amberite's ranks from skilled should go in planer sense then I would suppose.


Another Question under the Amberite what is the Walk in Shadow Skill?

Edit I'm making the guess it should be planer sense but not sure.


Thank will have to update those after supper.


Is this gonna lead back to no swimming in full plate under any circumstances, even str 40 with armor training.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I have been working on a Red hand of Doom Kirthfinder Conversion. So far I have restatted several of the enemies and plan on starting the party around level 6. If anyone has the time take a look at the stat blocks and let me know what you think and what I might need to change.

Red Hand of Kirth.

Updated with working doc.


Okay sounds good I had forgotten the whole supernatural ability thing.


Hey a quick question Kirth

Sandwich stay out this is for our game:
Is there any way to apply metamagic to a supernatural ability such as a Hell hounds breath weapon? Creating a Draconic Hell hound for my Red Hand of Doom Conversion and would prefer them do be doing Electricity Damage over fire.


Yeah sadly southeast AR does not have a huge tea selection outside of a couple of hours of travel. And I've yet to peruse any online stores but might have to.


The real question is does 1x dex with 2hw and .5x with off-hand mean we can TWF with 2hw and armor spikes since we are keeping to the unwritten rule of only getting 1.5x modifier total.


Byakko wrote:

*munches on popcorn*

Guys, it's obviously not clear.

I propose an alternative question:

What do you predict the FAQ will say?

Nothing that will definitively stop this back and forth. It will just go to how wrong or right the FAQ is.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I will Travel Across the Threads.
Flagging Far and Wide.


leftover fried chicken, shells and cheese, and honey butter rolls


I drink mostly Twinnings Irish breakfast in the morning. And Stash Chai in the evenings. It's been a recent thing to enjoy hot teas on more occasions but its easier than coffee a lot of times.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't have a thread just thought you were going off pictures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wait have you been assuming I'm a Kobold this whole time GreenTeaGameer???


Crossing my fingers since its FAQ Friday. Maybe this topped the list.


DM_Blake wrote:
Weables wrote:
I agree with your premise, though your dragon example is completely flawed. As its a 3d game, you're dealing with squares that you occupy. even if paizo ruled that you cant avoid difficult terrain by going around, it would only be people who ended up occupying that 5 foot cube that are impacted. Ironically enough, you forgot the Z axis, as the dragon wouldnt be occupying the 5 foot cube that is difficult terrain

I forgot it?

Didn't we both say that the dragon is not affected by the jungle?

I think what he is saying is that the dragon isn't moving through a square with difficult terrain. However the monk in the opening example is still moving through the 5x5x5 area which has the terrain thus the dragon isn't going to be affected because he isn't moving thought it but the monk technically still is.


Smallville's Olsen wasn't bad however being played by one the Ashmoore brothers I kinda figured he was gonna die off.


I'm more of a bacon/pancetta and peas kinda guy. With lots of black pepper.


Sandwich I'll probably set your Check at around DC 25 to craft it. Don't forget you'll need the proper feats to cast and stuff and as far as actions you will be treated as mounted.


Just Sovereign Glue your self to the big guy and pray he doesn't go over a cliff.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:

*Arches eyebrow*

Just looking in to see if anything changed...

Nope, nothing new to say here. Proceed... Proceed.

I think we need to just go ahead and have a blog post about "hands" vs hands vs. not quite hands.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You sir are an institution. Or need to be in one not exactly sure which.


p-sto wrote:

Given that it's been nearly a week and over two hundred posts without any clarification from the design team I'm inclined to believe the text was made purposely vague because they didn't want to make a decision one way or the other on this matter and there's nothing wrong with that.

It looks to me like Paizo staff has been pretty quick to clarify a lot of different matters related to Unchained so I'm not sure why some here are so focused on insisting that this is a cut and dry situation and resistant to the idea that in PFS table variation will apply until an official statement is issued.

The Dev team is constantly working on FAQs and focus on the ones with the highest number of FAQ hits first unless a glaring error is noticed. I have seen questions go years before an FAQ was made simply because the issue wasn't high on the list.


So it's unclear whether or not it's unclear about how unclear it is?


Taenia wrote:

Ascalaphus we have to be careful using that argument or it leads to the buffet problem (just pick and choose which rules you want to believe and which you don't) Regardless, it is a Paizo product, written by their team and has not been updated in Pathfinder or PFS since written.

And if you go by RAW you can't choose to ignore a Rule that is written, even if you agree or disagree with it. The fact is we have a precedent, that supports one interpretation of RAW. I expect that we will see an Errata to bring it in line but until then, I don't see how we can interpret it any way else.

The problem with that logic however is that your working off an assumption still. Your assumption is that they left text out of Finesse Training on accident and meant for it to work like Agile.

The other side is the assumption that it was left out on purpose because it works differently.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Witch Mountain series.

There were several of the old ones then I think they remade some of those. Then they did the Rock remake.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What did I create?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well I'm stuffed. We had a customer appreciation day at work and cooked crawfish, shrimp, potatoes, corn, and sausage. We need to do this more often.


claudekennilol wrote:

I'm asking because there's a new feat in Heroes of the Wild. It's essentially a Style Feat that equates to Wheeling Charge for melee characters (without a mount, obviously)--i.e. it lets you charge through allies and around corners. It has the caveat of only working with a single melee attack and specifically calls out not working with Pounce. Unfortunately it doesn't say anything about not working with Pummeling Style/Charge. I'm at work now and don't have the specific wording of the feat with me (and as far as I can tell the community sites don't have it up yet, either).

So it's pretty clear, to me, that Pummeling Style is one attack. I didn't ask this question in the first post because the entirety of the combination hinges one whether or not Pummeling Style is actually one attack. Unless someone beats me to it, I'll post the actual text of the feat later tonight.

I am assuming your wanting to use it with pummeling charge. I would check with your GM on it for the time being as an FAQ could be a bit.


Are we talking 3.x gestalt or does PF now have rules for it?

1 to 50 of 4,369 << 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.