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

bob_the_great's page

5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


I have to agree with the people who say that there should be a FAQ about this. This is an iconic ability of a base class and has been a known issue for 5 years. If there is an easy answer it would take a minute for this whole question to be out to rest. If there isn't an easy answer, well, that's a major fault which should be fixed.

N N 959 wrote:
This line is unambiguous and makes it 100% clear that...

I personally read that line as a slightly redundant but possibly necessary clarification that the move-action precludes additional use of the spell effect. I could see someone trying to argue that the 'as if studied for 3 rounds' effect was single target but still getting the regular benefits of the spell against others. Said another way, that line clarifies that they can't have the larger cone effect of the spell active and concentrate on one target within effect while keeping it going.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

i hate the "Strength doesn't do much and we can't take damage away from it" argument because for many characters the only thing Charisma affects is skill checks and the only things Intelligence affects are skill points. i can build a human fighter with 6 INT and CHA, put my one skill point per level into perception, and i'm fine.

but lord forbid we devalue STR. it's worth holding back certain classes and fighting styles from something we know isn't broken because we might devalue STR in the process. nevermind that the most powerful class in the game doesn't need it at all and no one seems to care.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

i didn't want to be a Negative Nancy in the other thread but I'm glad that someone else feels the same way. in the Swashbuckler playtest thread the community hit the developers over the head with the fact that, despite their insistence otherwise, dex-to-damage is not broken. it is still inferior to a STR-based character and it is actually needed to make a DEX-based Swashbuckler better than a STR-based one.

and that's where some of this dex-to-damage obsession came from - in the playtest a Swashbuckler was more effective prioritizing strength over dex and that makes no sense whatsoever.

but in that thread they said we'd get dex-to-damage so all was well. sweet, i can play Dex-based without feeling like a chump. when i read Jason's post the first thing i thought was, "wait, there wasn't going to be a dex-to-damage feat in the book until Slashing Grace was determined too weak?" despite us showing them otherwise, despite us telling them over and over that they had created a Swashbuckler that was better built STR-based, and despite them saying we were going to get dex-to-damage, Jason just told us that they decided against dex-to-damage anyway and only threw it in last minute (and only for slashing weapons, wtf?).

and THAT makes absolutely no sense. dex-to-damage is so powerful that you insist it is mythic. it is so powerful that you spend time defending your stance on it in the Swashbuckler playtest thread, and in the time intervening you choose to not include it in the book. and then, at the last minute, you toss it in as a sweetener for another feat? it goes from being too powerful for a feat to being an add-on within another?

this whole thing makes no sense. Jason's response is either a load of bull or their process really is this disjointed and illogical. personally i think him lying to us in that response is less damning than accepting that they spent all that time deciding that dex-to-damage was too powerful and then tossing it in last-minute as a sweetener. if that's their process why should we have any faith in them whatsoever?

i just started playing a rapier-based swashbuckler and my DM has a simple rule, if it is printed i can use it. i guess i'll just have to accept that i'm a chump because i didn't create a swashbuckler with STR as a primary stat (from what we've heard nothing has been done to change this if you don't use Slashing Grace) or that uses a slashing weapon (i can't use the rapier feat until it is printed).


ok, so it is a house rule then. that made the most sense. i couldn't believe that i was the only one who thought the rule was annoying.

our DM did mention the "kingdom in the background" thing, but i figure he wants us to do some basics to get thing started. the unfortunate part is that i would like to do the kingdom-building but the rest of the party seems to view it more as a hassle than a fun aspect of the campaign.

for now i'll just have to leave things in his hands, i guess. hopefully his changes make things better. and the rest of the group buys in. thanks for the help.

Hi all, first post on the Pathfinder forums. My group recently started playing a kingmaker campaign. I know our DM is house-ruling some things, and I see a possible issue. I'm a bit of a rules lawyer though and don't want to question my DM if I'm just off-base here or misunderstanding.

By normal rules, do farms take multiple months to build? I ask because I can't find anything about how long farms take to build, implying that rules for it don't exist. my group started its kingdom in hills, where it costs 4 BP to build a farm. It takes one month per BP to build farms. Therefore, each farm will take 4 months to build.

My concern comes into play with consumption. Claiming the hex for a farm raises consumption by 1, and it will be 4 months until it starts to pay off consumption. So far we have three hexes (city, one where we started a farm, and another we just claimed (with intent of making it a farm). That puts our consumption at 4 (3 hexes + 1 city district) per month before edicts (my group chose token promotion and 1 festival, which i'm going to have to convince them to get rid of until we have some farms established). if we keep on adding hexes our consumption will soon be at a point where we won't be able to afford it with our monthly economy, and i don't want to dip into our small treasury spending BP on consumption that could be buying us buildings.

do we just need to slow down, wait 4 months for our first two farms to build, and then proceed slowly? we're not being very ambitious, just trying to build a road to Oleg's with farmland along it. it seems a little off that such a simple endeavor would be so difficult to accomplish (and afford) in about 6 months of game time. do i just need to adjust my expectations and start suffering phases where we do nothing? my group is already pretty "meh" about Kingmaker and I don't see them being especially patient with things taking forever. is my DM making things unnecessarily difficult on us?

thanks for any input.

©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.