|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Certain spells from the spell compendium, certain monsters such as the bonedrinker from monster manual 3. I also like the healing belt and the crystals that add to weapons and armor from the magic item compendium.
I also like Tome of Battle. I have a copy of the DSP version, but I have not gotten around to reading it yet.
I pointed that out a while back during one of our "gear(from loot) does/does not" affect CR discussions.
Basically if you advanced a hill giant by HD his loot is would be "standard" for his new updated CR.
If you advance the same hill giant by class levels he would gain NPC wealth as if his entire CR was made of class levels.
Basically the class levels rules are a different way of advancing than other methods.
Does it make sense? Technically those advancing HD should give you a monster who by natural ability alone is equal to the monster advanced by class levels, and npc wealth. Now I know this is not true, but that is the idea.
So it is not so much as the rules not agreeing, but not being perfect.
So what if you advance by HD and class levels? Well it is ad-hoc time. OK, honestly it is adhoc time when using plain old HD also, but you get my point. :)
I don't see a modification here either. It is more like "Here is one free spell. Choose any spell in your spellbook and cast it".
The sorcerer blood lines don't call out the sorcerer class or sorcerer spells. They say "you". I did not check all of them, but after seeing "you" 4 times in a row I sorta figured the rest of them were written that way.
PS: Some of them might only apply to sorcerer spells, but I am sure they are written in a matter to make it clear.
Jason is still a normal human so he would top out at Iron weight or level 4 or 5 in Pathfinder. I wont make a full build, but I would say he is a slayer.
improved unarmed strikes, improved grapple, weapon focus(multiple firearms), profession(soldier)
He probably gets a few more free bonus feats also.
dex 16 or higher
Syrus Terrigan wrote:
I am assuming yes means the hard way.
h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
PS: If "yes" meant give you the link then let me know.
I did not even notice the NPC was the same level as the party. That is not what Pathfinder counts as a boss fight. With only 3 players I would count their APL as 8, and depending on how good they are a CR 11 or 12 fight is in order, unless it is a miniboss fight to which I say go to CR 10.
PS: If you do this, in order to avoid overkill let me know approximately what their stats are. AC, attack bonus saves, perception, DC an enemy needs to save against spells.....
I am sure someone is going to come in here with the equivalent of "nu uh you are wrong", but having been through this before there are monsters with no treasure, standard treasure, and so on having very similar AC's and attack bonuses. And the monsters with no treasure are not any better than than those of an equal CR that do have treasure.
If Paizo intended for you to use treasure then those without treasure or with less treasure would have an innate advantage, but that is not the case.
PS: Before this is taken out of context, that does not mean that some monsters do not benefit more from treasure if it is added than others.
I know of 2 DPR calculaters. Both are excel based. I will give you the link to the easier one one.
It should also be noted that many people try to push their attack bonus high enough that they can hit with very low numbers. Even the NPC warrior class can hit(with less than a 10 on the die roll) with power attack against higher CR creatures if it is optimized with power attack going. Most PC classes get self buffs or bonuses and party buffs so it is a lot easier for them.
Of course depending on your GM and your party certain things may not be available to you, but for the purpose of a common baseline the DPR threads have shown the power attack is favorable despite antecedal evidence.
BA you may not have optimized your attack bonus enough to make PA worth it or your GM may have raised the AC enough intentionally to make PA not worth it. There could be other factors.
If the math shows that power attack was bad, then I would say that power attack was bad, but it is "good for me". Many people however, just use their experience as the baseline, but I think being objective is more important when trying to find an answer.
If someone on the boards has a different experience than I do where it leads to success or failure I often try to find out why. If I have an AC of X, and others say they have X+5 at a minimum, then I try to find out why. Does their GM give more loot than normal? Do they spend more money on AC? Does my GM not give enough loot? etc etc.
Real comment--->He wasn't serious. Basically this is a joke thread so nothing here should be taken seriously unless it has a disclaimer.
I game online, and I find it to be a great thing. I once had to go without gaming for a year because of a lack of players. Those in bigger cities have more options.
I will also add that just because you game online it does not mean you have to buy digital products as a player. You are still free to use your hardcover books. I actually access the info from a hardback faster if I have a general idea of where the info is in the book.
Over 90% of my books are pdfs however. I got tired of carrying all of those books around, and if I print pages out, and If forget a certain page I am out of luck. If I bring my laptop to a friend's house I can just use their computer to print out whatever I forgot. It has only had to happen once, but it would have impacted the game in a bad way.
Now to get on topic.
I hope these FAQ's keep coming out.
Fear: The majority of gamers become so nitpicky that every little detail has to be spelled out for them.
Dude, your username is the poster child of bloat.
What? I don't know spell you are talking about. Oh crap you did not even mention a spell did you? Um well I uh have to go now <backs out of thread>
Off-topic-->Real story: I was in a debate on the wizards 3.5 forums a few years ago, and someone tried to dismiss my arguments by stating that my name was the same as that spell. :)
This FAQ backs up what SKR says.
So since the effect is on the paladin there is nothing to stop it from harming the WtW.
Power Attack is well worth it. When you go from 100 point to 75 points you are less likely to change your strategy and go into panic mode than when you go from 100 down to 30 or less.
Another way to look at it, other than hit points is how many rounds until you can end an opponent. The longer they stay alive the longer they can kill or hurt you. Killing things with big hits works very well in Pathfinder. You can kill things with two weapon fighting, but it is not nearly as efficient, and even then you need to either push strength or get dex to damage along with other bonuses.
Another thing about big hits is that they are not impacted as much by DR that you cant bypass.
As an example if you do 70 points of damage over 5 hits, and the opponent has DR 10 then you only really did 20 points of damage.
If you do 70 points of damage over 3 hits then you have done 40 points of damage, which is double.
Unless you are fighting someone with really high AC compared to your attack bonus then you should be power attacking assuming you have the right weapon for it, but most full BAB martials can get attack bonuses so high that eventually their 2nd and 3rd attacks can reliably hit.
Smite does not really target someone in the manner that spells do.
It really works more like the ranger's focus ability for the guide archetype.
No special effect is being placed on the enemy in either case. What is happening is the enemy has been chosen to get more attention from both classes.
Also a similar topic came up before.
This feat does not work for medium armor and heavy armor, and another 5 feet is not likely going to matter that much with positioning in most combats. Normally the room is small enough that you can at least charge to get to the enemy. Even if it is better to move tactically it is likely to take 2 rounds to get into position no matter if you have 20 or 30 feet of movement.
If you have 30 feet of movement and you are in light or no armor then the extra 5 feet is not worth a feat, maybe a trait. If you are small and wearing light armor then you are likely an using a class that either does not need to be in melee combat too much or needs extra time setting up anyway.
This is more useful for medium to heavy armor types, and they can't even use the feat.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Maybe so. Ok, well most of the time...... :)
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Most enemies are mobile enough that 5 more feet is not going to save you, if the GM really decides to have them chase you. If he does not really want to chase you that 5 feet still did not matter, and many times that other feat you could have had instead of fleet can make it so that you are not in a life or death encounter.
Most animals and similar creatures such as magical beast can outrun you. Bigger humanoid(shape not creature type) types such as giants will be faster.
If they are actually medium sized things such as gnolls, and your GM is not giving them ranged weapons then he is giving you a way out whether he knows it or not. If they have ranged weapons they can attack you from a decent distance if you run, even if they have to take penalties. They can move and shoot instead of taking full attacks also, well depending on the bow.
You also have flying enemies you can't outrun. If the monster has teleport he can just be waiting for you, and set an ambush<---This happened to me after getting my butt kicked by a bone devil.
In an actual game I would not allow it(two earth breakers) because that is not the intent, but I still think the rule needs to be rewritten because some people at a table will try to use the wording, even if they know it is not the intent.
As to why people ignore fluff-->Flavor/fluff is not the rule, but it can give a hint as to what the mechanics intent. At the same time they can also not match the mechanics with regard as to how it works in the game, but it will be closer to how the feats looks if you were watching a movie or reading a book.
rules 101: When a feat says you treat something "as if..." you treat it as if it had that property. As an example half-orcs are treated as humans and orc with regard to certain effects.If feat says a one-handed weapon is treated as a light weapon for you then you can use weapon finesse with it, even thought it is not really a light weapon.
We get that the weapon is a two handed weapon but for all intents and purposes for "you" it is a one-handed weapon.
There are many examples of "as ..." and "like" in the book. This is rules 101, not something really complicated. I really don't see why its so hard to grasp.
Most GM's have a certain way they GM. If you have smart players they have likely adapted to your style of GM'ing. At the same time you may also need to adapt to your players.
I agree with Tacticslion. I always felt certain PrC's and feats were for GM's in 3.x/PF.
I had overlooked this spell. 24 hours of "F**@ you desert" is not going to allow me to run this Dark Sun campaign like I want to. I might have to nix this spell.
Hey it's Wraithstrike again with another meme.
Poster 1: X does not work because <insert rules related reasons)
Poster 2: Why are you so against it? It is not broken or anything.
Whether or not something is broken or OP is not the issue. It does not work because the rules do not support your view on it.
A readied action does not require perfect timing. You just have to recognize a specific action and act accordingly. It is not different than me waiting for a blue car to show up while talking to a friend, and making sure it does not enter my driveway.
But there has been no rule change, and he said he was speaking for the PDT from what I understood. Even if he was speaking only as SKR I would like to assume he understood the rules of a meeting he was a part of.
In your other post it seemed like the reskins, and not a power boost due to reskins, was the issue. The OP of this thread would also likely be against reskinning to gain power, and I don't think anyone here is supporting that. To me that is another topic entirely since the OP was speaking of reskinning in good faith from what I read.
If the GM runs the game as if people trust druids(or anyone with an animal companion) to control their animal companions then this is a non-issue, but if druids(etc) with certain animal companions would still draw unwanted attention then I agree the flavor then becomes a mechanical affect. However I would think that if the person came up with the example had that as an issue they would have mentioned it.
The flavor when set in stone just because "that is what the freelancer or designer wrote" can hinder a story more than it can drive a story. What matters is the flavor at the table, because that is what the story will contain. The flavor in the book is just a pre-written option.
Pathfinder is the core game, but it is not Golarion so they would be wrong. I do understand using Golarion as a default baseline for many things however since it is the default setting. The default setting of D&D based systems is not the game. Paizo even knows this. That is why they have the "Setting" line of books, and the core rule line. You can play without any setting books at all, and still be playing Pathfinder as written.
Not playing in Golarion is not changing the game as written at all. An example is that in Golarion you must have a deity as cleric or paladin, so you are actually changing the game as written if you do play in Golarion.
Marco Polaris wrote:
If a player wants a powerful character, but he does not like the flavor, I still see it as legit to reflavor it. Otherwise it is like saying only weaker characters should be allowed to have their flavor changed.
It is not like it would be any less powerful if he chose the original options, and just kept the original flavor.
I also don't see an issue with wanting powerful characters as long as you stay within the group's optimization limits.
If we are being that specific then the summoner is not really stepping on everyone's toes then. He is doing his thing in a different way than the other classes.
Some people just dont have good imaginations. Why can't the GM or another player help him come up with an idea as to how he would have certain weapons?
At what point did he say he expects a GM to change the setting, or that he would not make a character that would fit into a setting? People on these boards really need to stop reading too far into things and remember that they are not mindreaders.