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

Wraith235's page

FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 745 posts (757 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist. 28 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 745 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge *****

hi ... not sure if there is anything in Ogdon ... but Logan has games at toad and tricycle
SLC has both Hasturs and Demolition games
also at HaJoMaJe Games & Comics in Kaysville tho they haven't been on the schedule for a couple months that Ive seen (they have been advertising on the facebook page)

Utah county has Dragons Keep in Lehi and Provo and some (Rarely) in Orem)

check out the warhorn here
Wasatch Front PFS warhorn

and the facebook group here
Wasatch front PFS Facebook

also know we have an event coming up in October at demolition games in SLC

Shadow Lodge *****

ya Ive spent time studying your thread and it is a fairly different situation as yours is a regular games day

I have had a situation where a game was all the way to the last encounter and we had a player leave (which would have caused a tier change) but since you cant retier a game 85% of the way through ... ya

Shadow Lodge *****

guess I should have clarified ... the question is regarding the remaining players

Shadow Lodge *****

Damanta wrote:
Schedule a new session to finish the remainder of the scenario (like playing a module over several session).

and if that cant be done due it being at an event

again the whys and hows are being ignored

Shadow Lodge *****

this is hypothetical only but Id like to know how to handle this

not getting into the whys or the hows ... just a simple "what do I do"

if 2 players leave a 5 or 4 man table at the tail end of the scenario (under an hour left) leaving it at 3 or worse 2 players obviously breaking legality what do you do

Shadow Lodge *****

whats the runtime like on this one ?

Shadow Lodge *****

Andrew Roberts wrote:

Not true actually. Serpents Rise is 4*/5* only and True Dragons of Absalom is 5* only (Can't VO out of either of those).

I would imagine that Bonekeep 2 will follow the footsteps of Bonekeep 1 and can be run by VOs.

Andrew please reread the conversation I was not referring to true dragon's or serpents rise ....I was only referring to what John said about bonekeep 2 being a 4 star exclusive

What I said is 100% acurate as it pertains to the standard

True dragon's and serpents rise are the exception

Shadow Lodge *****

Francis Webb wrote:
John Compton wrote:
Yes, Bonekeep 2 is now a 4-star exclusive.
Can it still be run by non-4-star VO's? Does it still have to be run at a convention or could it be run at a store or home game?

4 star exclusive is just that .... it can now be run by any of the Following

4 star GM
5 star GM
Venture Lieutenant
Venture captain

Let the bodies hit the floor

examples of previous 4 star exclusives are

Midnight mauler in Season 2
Cyphermage delima in season 3
Day of the Demon in season 4
Bonekeep level 1 in season 5

Shadow Lodge *****

Thanks John for clarification. ...still don't have true dragon's but I have some players that have been bit chomping for bonekeep 2 since June of last year

I expect true dragon's will land soon

Shadow Lodge *****

I'd been told recently it was event only still (not 50 table event but event none the less)

Shadow Lodge *****

ok want to confirm something before I jump to assumptions ... Checked and just had

serpents rise
ruins of bonekeep 2

added to my downloads
am I correct in assuming that bonekeep 2 is now open for 4-5 star GM's to run in the wild ?

Shadow Lodge *****

its now August 26th and I do not have access to these

I'll also send you a PM about it too

Shadow Lodge

just checking in on this ... 3 weeks since GenCon ended - any word ?

Shadow Lodge

Cronge wrote:
John Compton wrote:
Qstor wrote:
When will this be added to the 5 star GMs accounts? Thanks
I'll check with my scenario-granting coworkers to see when we can expect this.
Any word yet?

agree - its been 3 weeks since GenCon updates would be appreciated

Shadow Lodge *****

Encounter 1 -During Combat:
The gnolls initially try to avoid permanentlydamaging any of their slaves, but the more damage the
gnolls sustain, the more lethal they become.
Same text at both tiers

Encounter 2 -During Combat:
Farug uses lethal force to quell any serious
slave uprising, and he switches to nonlethal attacks if it
seems clear that he’s winning the fiht. He barks commands
at his subordinates and tends to get frustrated when they
can’t match his tactical cunning


The gnolls follow Farug’s lead and deal
nonlethal damage if he does

Same text at both tiers

leaves quite a lot to gm interpretation IMHO tho if you were getting rolled as hard as it sounds then - yes I agree

Shadow Lodge *****

Calenor wrote:

Just to be curious, knowing that you play high with a low group, why did you choose the frontal assault, and did't sneak into the Fortress, as ordered by VC?

This would have made these encounters a lot easier.

having just played this on thursday and running out of time my guess is stagnation on the 1st encounter spot or simply saying "Ive had it with the treatment"

I know when we went on the offensive things sped up SIGNIFIGANTLY

Shadow Lodge *****

IMHO if a GM makes a mistake its on the GM to fix it if possible

I have 2 different examples from personal experience both times I was a GM

1st was Legacy of the stonelords at paizocon last year, a PC Died at my table and even I wasnt 100% Comfortable with how it happened, I decided to research things over the next several hours even into the next day
I found that I had indeed made the right call and spoke to the player explaining my process - he was ok with it

2nd was during a Bonekeep game - I had killed a PC in 1 particular encounter, later while discussing it with some people a friend of mine reminded me of how the mechanic that killed the player actually worked,
I showed up to the FLGS the next week with a red pen and overruled the death myself

I do agree that weeks later on a public forum is probably a bit late to the party
but IMHO the best way to police something like this is from the GM himself -
unfortuinatly in a con setting due to time constraints and everything it makes that difficult

tho I would beg for more details ... what was the option presented to you from the HQ Table ? I dont think Ive seen that listed
and one with as extensive as yours Im not sure how I would handle it

Shadow Lodge *****


Shadow Lodge *****

forgive me ...maybe Im blind ... but I see nothing in the errata that applies to pistols, Muskets yes but nothing for pistols

Shadow Lodge *****

Joe Ducey wrote:

If you have the 6-98/6-99 and the requisite stars you can run them.

As for Bonekeep 2... that's still up in the air/debatable.

the question was based on when those 4 and 5's not at PaizoCon or GenCon will see these scenarios added to their account

Shadow Lodge *****

so I dont mean to shamlessly bump this .. but is there any update on this as of yet ?

also is there any word on if / when bonekeep 2 will become open to 4 and 5 star GM's .. I have a group in another city still waiting on word about this - they played part 1 under me and have characters on hold for part 2

Shadow Lodge

BNW no offense but I never said you hated them ... I Paraphrased what you said

its ok if its a low level Monk (or 8 and lower)
but its not ok for a 9th+ ...

thats about the most hypocritical stance Ive ever seen

and what do you call it by allowing it for 8 and lower Monks but not for 9+ if not punative

you also Chose to avoid answering the situaion I presented to you

7th lvl Monk Aborts Flurry - by your interpretation your going to let it slide
9th level you wont

what happens when they are both at your table

Shadow Lodge

its really odd I cannot reply to your entire post

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Manyshot: Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows.

Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action.

I don't see the difference in wording that you're alluding to here.

Ok, so what logic reason and rules basis make many shot works the way that they clarified?
I'm at a loss as to what difference in wording you're getting here.

When Making a Full Attack Action

Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action

very different Wording ... one IS .. the other happens WHEN


I'm not ignoring them.

I see that they're there.

I see what you're saying.

What I see is that there is a contradiction between the general case where you can choose to make a full attack after your first attack and where conditions on your first attack require you to decide to full attack prior to making it.

Fighter attacks at +6 bab. he hits. Monster dies. There's no contradiction: he hasn't decided to full attack and he doesn't have to because his attack would be the same either way. its full attack yes/no status doesn't matter so it doesn't get checked.

With other abilities RAW gives me a timey whimey ball that raw cannot untangle. I don't decide to full attack until after the first attack. I have benefits on the first attack that don't exist unless I'm full attacking.

That leaves open, if not requires,...


Find me raw that says you can full attack without full attacking.

Thats the problem There IS no raw resolution to this and you're treating it like there HAS to be. Like the rules are perfect, don't contradict, and never but heads in opposite directions.

we have provided Raw for you - numerous times

you have to make a full attack in order to get multiple attacks, but can abort the rest of your attacks based on the result of the 1st Regardless of the method by which you get multiple attacks


By my interpretation The rapid shotter, The ierative attacker, magus, the two weapon fighter, and low level monks can all abort with no penalty. The idea that i'm trying to punish anyone for being outside of that, or dislike high level monks but not low level monks, is absurd. I MIGHT be a lunatic, but hating on builds does not fit the pattern of my lunacy here.

I just think that if you get benefit you pay the cost. Equivilant exchange and all that.

and its your interpretation because you dont like it .... and regardless of saying your not trying to punish anyone for being outside of that ... by using this Stance that IS in-fact exactly what your doing what are you gonna tell the table of 2 monks (7 and 9) having the lvl 7 abort an attack but when the 9 tries you say "Nope you get a benifit to attack from flurry" that wont go over well at all

Shadow Lodge

Allow me to rearrange this for organizational stuff

BigNorseWolf wrote:
IF those are the only rules you look at then yes. But you cannot call other positions ridiculous when you only look at rules that agree with you and not the rules that agree with the other position

Manyshot had Wording that forced it to only be useable as part of full attack action, Rather than it being its own Full attack action (such as FoB, Rapid, TWF, Iteratives) and as far as I was concerned Manyshot Locked you into a full attack action (and the FAQ Clarified this). While other full attack actions (FoB, TWF, Iteratives, Spell Combat, Rapid Shot) were convertable to a standard after the 1st attack - As per the Rules

Im sorry but as much as you would like to think I am ignoring "Rules that agree with other positions" (Like you are) Im not ... Manyshot is an exception to the standard , not the standard itself

So now the burden of proof is on you ... Find me some RAW with source that States if you gain a bonus from a full attack you cannot abort and take a move, find me Raw that says "Manyshot is the standard not the exception" because others are looking and not finding it.. As far as I know there is no RAW supporting the "Bonus no move" Thought process far as I can tell this is a fabricated rule


It very much does not.

And you cannot both deny a slippery slope and then try to grease the ramp like this. It is entirely possible to use other criteria than "do it all the time"

Is ANYONE arguing against being able to stop after the first iterative attack? No, so this isn't a genuine counter argument.

the Slippery slope argument - as you call it - Started as Sarcasam -

however your Cherry Picking of the paragraph has given the Sarcastic comments Legitimacy

Specifically - no, no one is arguing the abortion of iterative attacks, tho you are Cherry picking the Paragraph and applying Raw to one of Several listed ways of gaining multiple attacks, - Which the Rule doesn't care how you get them, only if you have them - not the Whole if it therefore by your interpretation becoming punative to anyone gaining multiple attacks through means other than BAB.

Once you look at the Rule as a whole(Rather than only the parts you dont like) this is indeed a genuine counter argument - I would prefer to not have to Legitimatly go down this path TBH - but this Debate is Trollbait and has been from the start

Will you be applying the same penalties to TWF, Iterative, FoB, Rapid Shot because if you don't then you are applying rules you like / dont like because likely as claudekennilol said "I think it might be too powerful so I'm saying no"?

I dont see any other legitimate interpretation of this

--------All 4 Allow multiple attacks "because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason."

Also Note the above Rule Does not Differentiate between the source of multiple attacks ...

--------All 4 are Full attack actions
--------All 4 use the rule "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round."

the entirety of this is stated under "Full attack" in the combat section.This is RAW, and any change to this would only be because we do not like it or disagree with it

Is the position that you can't break off if your action requires you to full attack or gain a bonus from full attacking stopping iteratives? No.

as I mentioned above there is no differentiation on the Source of the attacks ... only "do you gain multiple attacks"

and as far as the "bonus no move" what about power attack, expertise, Critical Focus, deadly aim, .. if you use those are used in a full attack are you specifically precluded from breaking off and taking a move action - you ARE gaining a bonus... your Logic Not mine


You're acting as if the FAQ has no underlying logic, reason, or basis in the rules, which is just silly. FAQs aren't based on nothing they're based on something.

the FAQ is based on Logic, Reason and Manyshot which noone is arguing how it works anymore.

The FAQ doesnt even Touch FoB, Rapid Shot, TWF (or Spell combat) nor does it even pretend to

this is splitting hairs over a +1 at 9,13,and 17 - and since I know this argument started from PFS its basically a +1 at 9 and MAYBE at 13

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:

and you could even take it farther and argue that iterive attacks fall into this as well and makes the Rule about canceling the rest of your attacks a worthless rule that doesn't do anything

A slippery slope argument as no one is doing that. Though its good to know that two weapon fighting is specifically called out.

The "yes on penalties , no on bonus interpretation" is consistent with the text and the faq.

Sorry BNW ... there was a lot of Sarcasam involved because of the ridiculousness of this

Flurry is Termed as
"as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat" in the Monk CRB entry
tho it also falls into "Some special reason"(Flurry on its own is an EX)

so by those Rules listed in Monk and whats listed above ... you SHOULD be able to Cancel the remainder. particuarly since we only have 1 instance of something saying you Can't cancel it (Manyshot)

and if you look again ... even iterave attacks are called out as well so its not as slippery a slope as you may think - the slippery part is NOT allowing cancellation because it then becomes punitive decisions to Monks, TWF, Magus and anyone else that gain multiple attacks through Truthfully - anything

also under the logic of "Bonus no move" come power attack, Expertise, Deadly aim, fight defensivly, full defense, Critical focus feats, etc..

Shadow Lodge

srd wrote:

if you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack

After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

pretty straightforward IMHO .... tho I suppose if you want to follow this logic down its ultimate path any of the above mentioned situations (particuarly since they are lumped together in the description of Full attack) "because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason" you would be excluded from taking a move action after the 1st attack - you know whats good for the goose is good for the gander and all

and you could even take it farther and argue that iterive attacks fall into this as well and makes the Rule about canceling the rest of your attacks a worthless rule that doesn't do anything

edit - quote is from srd due to ease of copy paste

Shadow Lodge *****

another interesting one is Dermal Armor +1 (which functions as an amult of natural armor) I believe this is a more clear cut no ... but still something to consider since there IS a listed price for it .. can it be upgraded

Shadow Lodge *****

more than likely it will be banned over Errata'ed .... I have a friend who has said "a bargin at 25k" so I hope its just a simple price change

but since its a splat book an errata is unlikely particularly one this old

Shadow Lodge *****

it is legal

Equipment: all magic items on page 25 and pages 28-29; Prestige Class: Liberator (reduce all skill rank requirements by -3)

its on page 25

Shadow Lodge *****

Just reminding everyone that there is a level 12 character list google Doc for everyone to use

Shadow Lodge *****

Torch a member of the Decemverite ?

I shudder the thought

Shadow Lodge *****

Tri I sent you a PM

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheFlyingPhoton wrote:

I was kind of hoping there might already be something that distinguishes between "is half-human" and "has the humanoid type" that my own searches failed to turn up. I was especially hoping there would be something said by campaign leadership, since the agreed upon stance in this disagreement has been, "argument from authority is the best argument."

Wraith235 wrote:

are you the GM or player

if your the GM then the burden of Proof is on them
if your the player then you get to Just Roll with a broken rule set or quit playing with that group

is this Rule actually affecting you as a character in a negative way ?

This has only come up when I am the player. No one in my area is trying to enlarge their melee Outsider.

It mostly only comes up in regards to Hold Person. I almost never see an enemy caster with Hold Person, but every time I do, it just happens to be when someone from the pro-#2 camp is GMing and there are people playing Outsiders (and the Outsiders end up getting targeted with it every single time). This is such a corner case, but the frequency of it is getting frustrating. It's seriously happened the last three or four times this one GM in particular has run over me.
Whenever it comes up, I and the other players that agree with everyone in this thread just let it go. It hasn't caused anything catastrophic.

Wraith235 wrote:
I would say leave

That is way too far for the given situation. The GMs in question are overall good GMs, they just have a few rules blind spots.

They don't GM all that often anyways.

Wraith235 wrote:
or contact a VO in your area
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, about that...

Bottom Line - unless they are an aasimar with Scion of humanity ... they are outsiders(Native) and target humanoid doesnt work on them

and no Faq is required for that ... just look at the entry in the beastiary

Shadow Lodge *****

are you the GM or player

if your the GM then the burden of Proof is on them
if your the player then you get to Just Roll with a broken rule set or quit playing with that group

is this Rule actually affecting you as a character in a negative way ? if so then I would say leave or contact a VO in your area .. not much they can do about it other than say "Hey- do your research"

if not - meh let it slide ... or better yet point them to this thread .. IIRC the ONLY thing Mike brock commented on was FCB Stuff but its been over a year

but the "Scion of Humanity is useless and does nothing" that just shows a lack if intelligence IMHO

Shadow Lodge *****

#1 is Correct
#2 is Sort of Correct

Aasimars have an alternate Racial Trait called Scion of Humanity that makes THEM subject to the spells listed above (it specifically makes them count as humanoid)

SRD wrote:

Scion of Humanity Some aasimars' heavenly ancestry is extremely distant. An aasimar with this racial trait counts as an outsider (native) and a humanoid (human) for any effect related to race, including feat prerequisites and spells that affect humanoids. She can pass for human without using the Disguise skill. This racial trait replaces the Celestial language and alters the native subtype.

however they are the only ones with that option

so as Scion of humanity says Humanoid(Human) - YES .. Bane / favored enemy Human does work on them - but ONLY them (not Tiefling or the elemental races) and ONLY if they have that Trait

Furthermore - only Aasimars with that trait may take Human Favored class bonuses as well

Shadow Lodge *****

I know Gencon is still in its final day so Im not worried
but is there a window planned on these 2 scenarios are landing for 4 and 5 star GM's ... Im already starting to get questions for updates on these

Shadow Lodge *****

all +1/2 effective level Favored class bonus's got Changed to +1/6

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

ran into this thing while playing Iron gods tonight ...

whats the deal with the DC on the aura ... DC 27 what (Fort reflex will)

and what does the save for the aura actually do ... since the ability tied to the aura seems to indicate that the save listed in the aura
is irrelivant as there is no text to support what a succesful save causes

Shadow Lodge

andreww wrote:

Lets see, my level 8 Occultist Arcanist has recently hit level 8. She has:

Cloak of Resistance
Int Headband
Handy Haversack
Eyes of the Eagle
Cracked dusty rose prism ioun stone
Many scrolls
Several spell lattices
Potions (remove blindness and gaseous form being key)
Mithril Buckler (no ASF)

She has spent a fair bit of cash on copying spells from other casters and is currently saving for a +con belt and a vest of escape to support her disable device skill. She will bump her headband to +6 when possible but that probably wont be until about level 10.

You might want to consider skill boosting items for key skills. Also having the Haversack means you shouldn't forget the mass of useful alchemical stuff you can carry. Anti plague/venom, alchemist fire, masterwork tools, pathfinder chronicles, a collapsible bathtub etc.

A lot of people will tell you to ignore AC entirely but I find that a +1 ring of protection and amulet of natural armour isn't a bad buy. You wont be avoiding primary attacks much but you can get to a point where secondary natural attacks and iteratives are likely to miss which may well save your bacon.

Clear Spidle Ioun Stone

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have a life Oracle that bought a swarmbane clasp just to loan out ... tired of dealing with swarms

Shadow Lodge *****

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Deussu wrote:
And last but not least something we dubbed "Cheesedome". A kitsune wizard-something that utilized Emergency Force Sphere to a ridiculous degree, leaving enemies inside the unmovable force sphere. Also had an azata familiar who used wands of ill omen to further contribute to the "cheesiness". All hate/love/laughter generated by this cheesemonger character can be directed to the world's northest (?) venture-lieutenant Markus Hyytinen. :)
Hmm, I would like to know how he used a 5ft sphere centered on himself to trap his enemies. Maybe I hit him up.

its a 5 foot radius so using the apex you COULD cover 4 PC's

I do this all the time in Iron gods

Shadow Lodge

Sacred Shield Enchantment - if you channel energy you can burn 1 use for a +1 Sacred bonus to AC for 24 hours or untill hit

Also the PrC Holy Vindicator does that as well but boosts it from a + 1 to "how many dice do you roll to channel energy"

Shadow Lodge *****

what quad said ....

I have found myself asking that question about only a couple of books

Cheliax - empire of devils being 1st and formost

see Cornagun smash and emergency force field

Shadow Lodge *****

so I ran this at APcon ... and over the last 24 hours I have been scouring this scenario Hoping I did something Wrong

Reguarding the 2nd PA point

am I correct that the ONLY Hint about the Loyalist Propaganda is dutring the Argument with Olandil and Poppo when poppo Says The Following ?

Poppo says, “One word of warning! Once you leave here, the
Passfiders are going to be blamed for everything, right?”
Olandil shrugs, “Your point is? I don’t care if the Loyalists tell
all of Cheliax the Pathfider Society caused everything that has
ever gone wrong in this town.

I have scoured this from 1 end to the other and the above is the ONLY mention that something Might happen ... and whats sad is even the Summary seems to support it

If the PCs succeed, every faction except the Loyalists also agrees to help the PCs counteract the loyalist’s anti-Pathfider propaganda, while the Loyalists assure the PCs that they will not produce such propaganda in the fist place, and give the PCs a chance to question Olandil.

Nothing is mentioned at the start in the briefing or knowledge checks... Nothing is mentioned (or available) from

The information broker

am I missing something ?

Shadow Lodge *****

My theory with the nexus crystal is that
it had a larger role to play in the planned but canceled part 4 , I have no proof ....but based on the other floors that is just the feel I got

Shadow Lodge *****

Looks like I ran past the edit mark

in conclusion IF retraining is done in Bulk then Class for Class is the safest way to go - as long as there IS Synergy and CAN be done in bulk- but if you've missed more than 1 PA / level it becomes impossible - and Synergy as we have seen is subject to individual GM interpretation

by the Numbers - if you can justify Uncanny, imp uncanny and sneak attack dont have a retrain cost (More than likely)
the Ninja and rogue tricks as Identical and rule that they dont require retrain costs(this is 9 levels of Shady and has more bugs than a bait store) then Archtype is the way to go

either way I believe there is too much left open to interpretation of the individual GM's to not get a hard Ruling on this

Shadow Lodge *****

Andrew Christian wrote:


Do the math for both doing it as an archetype, and doing it as a class.

When we see what the math actually is, maybe that will make a difference, or maybe it won't.

Regardless how you do it, I'd say it definitely has synergy.

Ugh you had to say that ... ok

As we've seen if there is no Synergy - 7PA/ level
if there is Synergy - 5PA/level

Archtype Theory- Following the example given in Ultimate campaign you would only need to pay the cost once to Drop any given ability (thank god or this gets ugly)
Each ability is 5PA to Drop - for the purpose of this excersise I will Treat Sneak Attack and No Trace as 1 ability (or this breaks before we even begin) and use a 12th level model and only including the levels where an ability is gained

Max PA / level is 6

1st - 0-5PA
Poison Use 5PA
Sneak Attack 5PA
Total 10PA

2nd -6PA
Ki Pool 5PA
Ninja Trick 5PA
Total 20PA

3rd 12PA
No Trace +1 5PA
Total 25PA

4th 18PA
Ninja Trick 5PA
Uncanny Dodge 5PA
Total 35PA

6th 30PA
Light Steps 5PA
Ninja Trick 5PA
Total 45PA

8th 42PA
Improved Uncanny Dodge 5PA
Ninja Trick 5PA
Total 55PA

10th 54PA
Master Trick 5PA
Total 60PA

11th 60PA
Total 60PA

12th 66PA
Ninja Trick 5PA
Total 65PA

so following that ... a Straight class Ninja COULD Retrain at 11th (0PA Spent)or 12th level if they only ever spent 1 PA over their entire career

if this excersise had been done at the projected average of 4PA/ level it would be impossible - but then so would class even with Synergy

an Argument could be made for the Following
Sneak Attack - Both get the ability at Identical levels
Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge - both get the abilities at Identical levels

This Thought IMHO Holds more water than the Following

Ninja Trick and Master Trick really puts us in the same boat either way we look at it - its either multiple entries or 1 entry with class feature retraining (since its different lists) - this is further supported via the following statment

SRD Sidebar wrote:

The retraining rules say, "If retraining a class level means you no longer qualify for a feat, prestige class, or other ability you have, you can't use that feat, prestige class, or ability until you meet the qualifications again." Therefore, if you retrain out of the base class and that causes you to no longer meet the requirements of the prestige class, you no longer have access to the class features from that prestige class, and therefore can't use that prestige class to meet the requirements of anything (including itself).

yes I realize this is quoting PRC's - but the ninja trick / master trick and Rogue talent / Advanced Talent are separate lists even tho the other side of the coin is that you can take the other classes Trick ability multiple times

and a combination of Uncanny dodge / improved Uncanny dodge / Sneak attack totals to 15PA Saved by level 8 which doesnt help much but does make it possible (40PA of 42PA possible total)

Tricks being removed from the calculation totals to an additional 30PA(5 at 2,4,6,8,10 and 12 Respectively) Saved at level 12 which would make this work - but an awful lot of YMMV and GM interpretation would have to go your way

there are a lot of other factors to consider as well - via the example on archtype retraining its concievable that you would have to pay for evasion, trapfinding, Trap Sense, and improved evasion Personally I dont think you would have to since the assumption with the Arctype theory is that Ninja is an archtype of Rogue so your only "Dropping alternate abilities"

but still the math doesnt add up when it comes to full Ninja Retrain without the stars aligning properly and the gods of GM'dom are completely on your side

Dips and partials builds is a different discussion - but this one as Ive said falls back into the question of - are you retraining in bulk or 1 at a time supported by the following

SRD wrote:
Example: Mark is playing a ranger 5/rogue 2, and has decided he'd like to retrain one of his ranger levels into a rogue level (so he has to find a 3rd-level rogue). When he completes the training, he immediately loses all benefits from taking ranger level 5 (base attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, Hit Dice, hit points, skill ranks, and class features), then gains 1 level in rogue, immediately gaining all the benefits of rogue level 3. Mark's character is now a ranger 4/rogue 3. This retraining did not change Mark's 7th-level feat.

on a Side note while scroling through Retraining I realise I was Wrong about the lack of presence of the Samurai, Ninja or Antipaladin ... it seems they are listed in the "Class Featurs" Section but that is the ONLY mention of Alternate classes

I know Ive said this several times but
Again - I am not questioning the Ruling which was made regarding Ninja and unchained rogue - all I am asking for is a procedural clarification on Alternate classes Retraining into their parents

Edit - Multiple edits based on fact and rules checking, Formatting and my disclaimer

Shadow Lodge *****

Weapon finesse and Dex to Damage for 1 weapon at 3rd and 11th level without a feats or enchantments - thats the big one and

in general its just better than the basic rogue

Shadow Lodge *****

as you can see 2 diferent people - 2 different opinions on the matter - and with unchained now out and all the ninja's wanting to become unchained rogues I see this question comming up a LOT more -

this is why Im hoping for some kind of official ruling

as I said I went through this months ago but over evasion and trap-finding, I was lucky to find my own way of making it work

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ron Feldman wrote:
Wraith235 wrote:

A) is Retraining done in Bulk Rather than 1 Item at a time

B) does Ninja Consider to have Synergy with Rogue
C) do we treat this as a Class or an Archtype

A) That's up to you. You would only be limited by the amount of gold and prestige points you have available to pay for the retraining.

B) No. If you look just below the text you quoted, you will see the list of class synergies. Ninja is not listed there. Neither is Samurai.
C) Class. The Ninja is a class, not an archetype.

It seems, though, that you know this, but are rather looking for an exception to be made for the ninja (and perhaps the samurai). If that's the case, it would probably be better to state that explicitly in your initial post and the title of your thread.

no ... Im actually not looking for an exception but rather a ruling, I am well past my bout of retraining (added 2 levels of monk and 1 level of ranger to fix the issues)

but Look at
A) you cannot have both levels of Ninja and Rogue as per the Alternate class rulings
B) so then a 4th level Ninja CANNOT retrain into a 4th level Rogue due to PA Requirements (1PA/day = 7 days non synergy ... Max of 6PA / level)
C) I tend to agree tho there has been language in the past that make Alternate classes more akin to Archtypes than classes

Mike Stated that its possible to do it - Im just asking how

1 to 50 of 745 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.