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

deusvult's page

FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,303 posts (1,460 including aliases). 6 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 19 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

alexd1976 wrote:

I find that some people take the approach of "If the rules don't explicitly say so, I can assume my character is allowed to do X"

Example:

The rules don't explicitly say that you DON'T start with a fly speed of 10, therefor all characters must have it.

Why is it that people make assumptions like this?

I keep running into things posted on here where people are basically saying that they think the rules work a certain way, and ask if someone can disprove it...

I offer this suggestion:

If you think something needs to be interpreted, don't ask if someone can disprove it, show why you think it is a certain way!

I don't know if I'm being clear, but I will check back and clarify after a few posts...

Thoughts?

If the premise is changed slightly, the entire discussion is changed immensely.

If the player is instead saying "The rules don't explicitly say I can't, then I can assume I can" is actually basically right. The only time "The rules don't say I can't" is trumped by "They don't say you can, either" is when the topic is a fantastic element of the game. "real world relevant" aspects of the game use the assumption that the rules are only a framework and not intended to cover every possible thing.. recognizing that GMs exist to apply common sense rulings on things that aren't explicitly said.

So, the absence of an allowance is generally not a prohibitation. "It doesn't say you can, therefore you can't" only applies to rules discussions about things like spells, monster abilities, and so on.

Of course, as Rhedyn said, the entire train of thought is moot when the GM throws rank, anyway.

Sovereign Court

Chengar Qordath wrote:
deusvult wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Can your Axebeak understand your spoken words?

Usually there's just Handle Animal. You issue the command to attack, and charge.

You'd need another command to get it to stop.

Why would it have to?*

If you don't give it the command to attack, it shouldn't attack. It doesn't automatically attack everything that comes in reach while you ride around afterall. Not if it's properly trained, anyway.

If the rider intends to charge some target and doesn't give his axebeak the command to attack (verbally or otherwise) its reach should be irrelevant, and from a meta-view is reach should objectively NOT prohibit the rider from coming into his 5' reach since it's not an option for him to come up short. 10' reach is irrelevant when the declared charge attack is 5' reach, is it not?

The problem is that this isn't the mount performing normal movement, it's the mount using the charge action—which involves making an attack.

No, charge actions involve combining movement with the option to attack. The attack is not mandatory. If you want to take what is effectively a double move with restrictions on where you can go and what terrain you can cross and suffer a -2 AC for the bother, you're completely free to do so.

In the case of a rider without reach and a mount with reach, it's actually got meaningful benefit in doing so.

Sovereign Court

The free RPG day adventure for 4th edition has quickstart rules in it, and is (as the name suggests) free.

Sovereign Court

I'd say that the most notable thing I've learned on the Paizo forums is that it's a terrible idea to grapple a succubus.

Wait.

Or did I learn it's a great idea?

Sovereign Court

Ah, I failed to understand where you were coming from.

alexd1976 wrote:
Weapons: Light and one-handed bludgeoning weapons, spears, and arrowheads can all be made of stone.

Still, syntactic ambiguity allows for at least two ways to interpret that sentence. And both are perfectly RAW.

In effect: All Light and one-handed bludgeoning weapons, spears, and arrowheads can all be made of stone.

It can also be read as

In effect: Light bludgeoning and one-handed bludgeoning weapons, spears, and arrowheads can all be made of stone.

Sovereign Court

alexd1976 wrote:
Actually, normal stone doesn't work as well, you can do spears and arrows, but not daggers/slashing weapons :(

You can most definitely make stone slashing weapons and knives. Obviously they don't hold an edge as well is iron or steel, but they can be made incredibly sharp. Obsidian's qualities are well known, including its fragility.

Welded tuff isn't as well known to laypersons, but that material knaps to a wicked edge as well and is much more durable than obsidian.

Sovereign Court

GM Olmek wrote:
... an Earth Ring of 2 is really pushing it. Mirror, Mirror is very dangerous.

With that advice, I'll propose to swap Nagasawa's Intelligence and Willpower stats, in effect trading Fire and Earth ring values. It doesn't effect points spent or insight, but probably moves his survivability into more of an acceptable minimum threshhold for a bushi in an insight rank 3 campaign.

His background doesn't really suggest particular smarts, and I'm sure Utaku Nari would argue the opposite is actually the case. Meanwhile, he never truly blossomed until training with the Crab, and if their ways were what was successful it makes sense to say he's been "toughened up" under their tutelage. So swapping those values actually seems to make better sense given the background I created, anyway.

Sovereign Court

Ok, my Unicorn horse archer is ready for submission!

Shinjo Nagasawa:
NAME: Shinjo Nagasawa
CLAN: Unicorn
SCHOOL: Shinjo Bushi
RANK: 3 (Shinjo Scout Path for rank 2)
Age: 25 Sex: Male Height: 5'8"
Description: Corded build overshadowed by a lanky, lithe frame. When not covered by an ostentatious steel and crimson gaijin helm, his shoulder-length hair is worn loose and free. His fashions usually skew towards disgusting for non-Unicorns; heavy leather riding boots and a mantle of decorative animal pelts over a utilitarian and rugged clothing is his norm. On formal occasions, he believes that liberal applications of perfume is sufficient to mask the inevitable, permeating smell of leather and horse in his courtly attire.

FIRE 3 (Agility 4)
AIR 3 (Reflexes 4)
EARTH 2 (Stamina 3)
WATER 3
VOID 4
GLORY/STATUS: TBD
HONOR 4.5
INSIGHT 185

INITIATIVE 7k4
TN TO BE HIT: 25 (28? in armor)
Armor Reduction: 1?

Health/Wounds x2
Healthy (+0) 10
Nicked (+3) 14
Grazed (+5) 18
Hurt (+10) 22
Injured (+15) 26
Crippled (+20) 30
Down (+40) 34
Out 38

TECHNIQUES
Way of the Ki-Rin: When spending a Void Point for 1k1 on a School Skill, you may add your rank in Horsemanship to the total. This cannot be used in the Center stance.
The Swift Soul: You may use your Stealth skill while on horseback. You are considered to have the Way of the Land advantage no matter where you are. Finally, you gain +1k0 to all attack rolls while mounted.
The Four Winds Strike: You make attacks as a Simple Action when wielding weapons that possess the Samurai keyword. If you are fighting while mounted, you may also attack as a Simple Action when wielding a bow.

ADVANTAGES
Ally (Hiruma Ryoichi), Gaijin Gear (Yodotai Centurion’s Helmet), Quick, Wealth 2

DISADVANTAGES
Bitter Betrothal (Utaku Nari), True Love (Utaku Saki, Nari’s twin sister), Doubt (Stealth)

SKILLS
*Athletics 2
Animal Handling 2
Battle 2
*Defense 3
Etiquette 1
*Horsemanship 5
Hunting 3
Investigation 2
*Kenjutsu 3
*Kyujutsu (Dai-Kyu) 5
Lore: Crab Clan 2
Lore: Gaijin Cultures 1
Perform: Dance 1
*Stealth 3

*=School Skills

EQUIPMENT
Ashigaru Armor, Daisho, Sturdy Clothing, Dai-Kyu (Quiver with 10 armor piercers, 10 willow leafs), survival knife, Unicorn Riding Horse, Travelling Pack: (Daisho Stand, Flint and Tinder, Perfume, Small Hand Mirror, Spare Kimono and Sandals, Makeup Kit, Exotic Spices, Pillow Book (Memoirs of an Opium Eater), Small Tent, Coin Purse). Fine Kimono of last Winter Court’s Fashion (complete with Peaked Cap, Hakama, and Haori)
14 koku (less the cost of the fancy digs)

HISTORY

Air
We are the people of the wind!
—Traditional Shinjo Invocation

Nagasawa is the third son in a cadet branch of the House of Shinjo that has not produced a notable hero since the end of the exodus and the epic Battle of White Shore Plain. Being a minor scion of a minor bloodline had no effect on the grandeur of his childhood aspirations. He devoured the tales of the accomplishments of his ancestors, always imagining himself as being the hero who will restore such glories to his line.

As he grew old enough to begin his training, he came to resent his older brothers and to his shame came to hope that the Unicorn Clan would finally find itself embroiled in a proper war once again; not for the chance of glory but that his older brothers might perish in it and he could claim the right to wield the katana of the bloodline’s sole hero.

Water

That General is skillful in attack whos opponent does not know where to defend.
-Shinjo Maku, Master Sensei of the Shinjo Dojo

As it happened, the Clan enjoyed peace and he would not be elevated by default to heir to the bloodline, such as it was. Childishly selfish notions of glory were banished by the senseis of the Shinjo Dojo. His early mastery of horse and bow steered him away from the chargers and heavy cavalry he idolized since childhood. Instead the Shinjo senseis would train him for a very different, and far less glorious form of combat. He was trained to become a practitioner of a uniquely Unicorn hit-and-run style of combat born from experiences fighting gaijin “guerrillas” and “kommandos” that was blended with more recently observed tactics from the Daidoji and Hiruma, as well as harder lessons learned from Scorpion Saboteurs.

He took well to the training, particularly since he would be more likely to see combat than those bushi staffing the glorious heavy cavalry legions with little to do outside of open war. The only aspect of his training in which he did not excel was skulking and ambushing. It required a certain mindset to reconcile the demands of duty that compromise honor, and he felt that attacking enemies before either side had a chance to brag about lineages and accomplishments would not give him honorable victories from which he could gain glory.

Still, he managed to complete his Gempukku satisfactorily but without distinction. That did not keep him from choosing, as the first bushi in many generations, to borrow his bloodline’s most celebrated name, Nagasawa. His eldest brother elected not to pass down their grandfather’s katana in light of this, and instead allowed the Clan to provide him a new blade. “It is fitting, younger brother” he said, “that since you wish so badly to rewrite our family tale of decline that you have a fresh blade untarnished by our failure to do so.”

Earth

After climbing a great hill, one finds there are many more hills to climb.
-Shinsei

Shinjo Nagasawa’s initial duties were to patrol outside the Unicorn frontier, and cut his teeth on gaijin troublemakers roaming too close to the Empire. There he met with success against scattered bandits and raiders, and these few victories led to his promotion to lead a squadron of light cavalry. This recognition reignited delusions of grandeur and he began to chafe for reassignment back inside the Empire for action against more worthy foes.

After having once again become cocky and overconfident, his squadron identified a long-range reconnaissance patrol of Yodotai soldiery deep in the Burning Sands. Rather than falling back to report such an ominous portent, he led an immediate attack in hopes of claiming a coup for his career. Although he survived the encounter, and even slew the commanding Centurion and claimed his helmet as a trophy, his outnumbered and lighter force was repulsed with heavy casualties.

After this “glorious defeat” he was reassigned under Shinjo O-Shimo’s command to crosstrain with the Hiruma corps of Scouts. There, it was hoped, the Crab would find a way where the Shinjo Senseis had failed to get through to Nagasawa that fulfilling one’s Duty is at least as important as preserving one’s Honor.

Shinjo O-Shimo’s first assessment of the hotspur was that if he could not be properly re-educated (and she had her doubts he could), perhaps the best way he could serve the Clan would be in a retired role. Early on she asked Bayushi Masayari, the nakodo to which she had immediate access, to find an eligible Shiotome lacking in confidence that would be well paired with a career-climber of an ambitious husband to impel her to fulfil her potential.

Contrary to her expectations however, Shinjo Nagasawa’s eyes were opened through his friendship with Hiruma Ryoichi as fellow trainees under harsh Crab sensei. In that uncomplaining bushi, Nagasawa saw what he came to view as a paragon of humility. Nagasawa was finally ready to learn to be a servant of his Clan rather than a proponent of his own glory, even if he couldn’t completely surrender to duty as did the example of his Crab brethren.

Fire

Doubt thou the stars are fire,
Doubt that the sun doth move.
Doubt truth to be a liar,
But never doubt I love.
-some Gaijin poet

Nagasawa had finally had the epiphany of accepting that that he will never be a famed tai-sa of the glorious Shinjo Chargers, yet through his abilities and training he may instead serve his family and Clan in other ways. However, Bayushi Masayari finally came through on Shinjo O-Shimo’s request: he had found a suitable Battle Maiden to match with Nagasawa. The families had already agreed, and there was nothing for Nagasawa to do in the matter but take leave to attend his miai in the Utaku Provinces to formally meet his intended: Utaku Nari.

There, capricious fate intervened to complicate Nagasawa’s finally straight and true path. For outside the castle, he was accosted by a Battle Maiden who inspected his travelling papers. Utaku Saki was not only Nari’s twin sister, but contained all the mischief of the pair combined. She impersonated her sister and seduced Nagasawa, telling him that the Shiotome are “expected to retire, marry, and have children… but not necessarily in that order.” Completely smitten and believing Saki to be Nari, Nagasawa willingly went along with her secret plan “spend the night” in a nearby ryokan together and to not tell anyone they had already met before their miai.

Of course, Saki remained out of sight at the solemn ceremony while Nagasawa smiled intimately at an utterly confused Nari. His betrothed became equal parts horrified and outraged when Saki finally made her appearance, having realized what her sister and Nagasawa had done. Barely able to keep her composure, she endured the betrothal ceremony without shaming Nagasawa for his indiscretion. Not for his sake, but for her unwed and (allegedly) chaste sister’s. Despite keeping his secret and agreeing to the match, Nagasawa’s fiancée has an unadulterated loathing for his stupidity, indiscretion, and/or both.

After his return to the Hiruma Dojo as an ineligible bachelor to resume training, he was astonished to begin to receive correspondence from Utaku Saki. She professes that she loves him, and while he’s not sure if she continues to play with him, he’s come to realize he does indeed love her.

Void

Don’t let schooling interfere with your education.
-Another Gaijin Poet

Not long after beginning to progress to the point that he could instruct Hiruma in tactics as well as be instructed, it was announced that Shinjo O-Shimo would be travelling to Kyuden Hida for Winter Court.

Nagasawa, buoyed by his recent successes, was ready to accept the news as an opportunity rather than the ominous portent perceived by so many other bushi at the Dojo. He made a point to introduce himself to Ide Toshimitsu via correspondence to cultivate a mentor for courtly activities. Having heard of Nagasawa’s recent impoved reputation from Shinjo O-Shimo, Toshimitsu was willing to provide tips and advice to the inquisitive and enthusiastic young bushi.

Despite Ide Toshimitsu’s advice, Nagasawa is not really sure what to expect from Winter Court. He optimistically looks forward to bringing credit upon Shinjo O-Shimo, the Shinjo Family, and the Unicorn Clan at the impending Winter Court.

Weapons
Anbishon (“Ambition”) is the name of his Katana. At least, informally, to his brothers and cousins who remember Nagasawa’s arrogant desire to single-handedly “correct” his bloodline’s place in House Shinjo. Nagasawa has not yet come to feel that he’s deserved to provide a permanent name for the blade.

Although the blade recently forged and does not yet have a notable history, the master swordsmiths at Kyuden Shinjo created a sword worthy of a legacy. The seven-layered blade’s hamon is artfully formed into the waves of the Water Dragon, to honor Nagasawa’s cadet branch of the family’s lands being on the shores of Mizu-umi Ryo. The tsuba, a gift from Hiruma Ryoichi, is a Crab and Ki Rin depicted back to back to face their foes together, and is constructed of solid Kaiu Steel and is said to be unbreakable.

Kenkyo (“Humility”) is the matched wakizashi. Constructed at the same time by the same Shinjo swordsmiths. Nagasawa has decided that unlike his katana, his wakizashi could not go without a name. Although he initially named this sword Unmei (“Destiny”) he decided that name was no longer appropriate. Both swords have matching tortoiseshell veneer saya, lacquered to enhance the natural beauty of the material and otherwise unadorned.

Tsubasa no Shi (“Winged Death”) is Nagasawa’s Dai-Kyu. Also ostentatiously named in the early days of his career, this great bow has a core of wood from secret Unicorn groves of the gaijin “Yu” trees. This material is unknown in the rest of Rokugan, but serves gaijin and Unicorn archers exceptionally well regardless. The bow is lacquered black but elaborately corded with bright red and orange dyed horsehair.

Baraq: Not a weapon, but no Unicorn is complete without mention of his steed. Baraq is palomino coloration and named in honor of a legendary flying steed from gaijin myth. The saddle is noteworthy for having its clasps and buckles wrapped in oiled cloth, and the tack lacks ornamentation customary to Unicorn bushi, especially hotspurs like Nagasawa. He has found that silenced and subdued riding gear suits his training and duties as a scout.

A few thoughts:

I'm not sure how horrible an idea it is to leave the Earth ring at 2 with what you have in mind for the campaign. I felt it fit appropriately with the quick, wiry kind of character that is otherwise built. Plus, he's supposed to be an archer and massacre things from outside retaliatory reach! However, I do fully anticipate that we'll see shadowlands nasties and if an earth ring of 2 is just unwise, I'll lower agility to pay for upping Willpower to at least get some thicker wound ranks.

Ally: Going off what you said, I figured 3 was a good price for Hiruma Ryoichi (1 for position, 2 for devotion)

Bitter Betrothal & True Love: Naturally, I'm ok with switching some names around to fit with NPCs or PCs. I do really like the idea of the two being twins, however, and ask that part remains. Of course, the nature of Saki's true feelings for Nagasawa are up to you as well.

Gaijin Gear: I'm hoping you'll allow the helmet to provide some TN or reduction.

Wealth: I'm going to let you tell me how expensive the snazzy (but last year's fashion) court clothes are going to be, and I'll then deduct my koku accordingly. They were probably purchased through Yasuki Kurako, I'd imagine.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:

Can your Axebeak understand your spoken words?

Usually there's just Handle Animal. You issue the command to attack, and charge.

You'd need another command to get it to stop.

Why would it have to?*

If you don't give it the command to attack, it shouldn't attack. It doesn't automatically attack everything that comes in reach while you ride around afterall. Not if it's properly trained, anyway.

If the rider intends to charge some target and doesn't give his axebeak the command to attack (verbally or otherwise) its reach should be irrelevant, and from a meta-view is reach should objectively NOT prohibit the rider from coming into his 5' reach since it's not an option for him to come up short. 10' reach is irrelevant when the declared charge attack is 5' reach, is it not?

It really is, in my opinion, the same rules interaction as charging when armed with a lance and shield. If you want to charge someone with your shield bash, you don't have to stop as soon as the lance's reach is achieved.

*= additionally, handle animal doesn't even come into play. Issuing orders to one's mount is completely covered by the Ride skill, but that's a whole different tangent.

Sovereign Court

Nefreet wrote:

Alright. New possibility:

With the Axebeak/Longsword combination, I suppose (assuming the Axebeak is your Animal Companion) you could perform the "Down" trick as a free action before it performed its attack, and then continue the movement portion of the charge so you could attack with your Longsword.

I just realized the charge rules use the word "may" attack, which would imply that it is possible to charge without actually attacking.

But, this would only be possible when riding your Companion, as known tricks otherwise require a move action to command.

What about the possibility that the decision about who's going to attack (and with what weapon) can be made before the movement even begins? If the axebeak is not making an attack, under what justification would it have to stop when it could first attack? Especially so when the charge rules stipulate that the rider's non-reach longsword attack may not stop prior to coming into reach?

Sovereign Court

Yeah, I did indeed believe that swarms had an immunity called out in the trait. I've only got the PRD to reference at the moment, but I have to concede that I certainly appear to be proven wrong on this one.

Sovereign Court

Jeff Merola wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

I don't know what else to say.

I quoted the relevant rules.

No, you quoted a rule that says a swarm is immune to spells and effects that target a specific number of creatures, except that hive minds can be targeted with them if they're mind affecting. That line has no bearing on AoE spells that have no specific targets.

Jeff, you should know better.

Swarms are immune to mind affecting effects. unless they have both intelligence and hive mind. Snake swarms don't have both, thus they have the immunity to mind-affecting (which Color Spray is) w/o the exception to the immunity.

Sovereign Court

arcanine wrote:


3) or dose that thing the samurai have on their backs count as holding?

That thing, btw, is called a sashimono. Or back-banner, if you prefer.

It wasn't just a samurai thing, either.

Sovereign Court

Nefreet wrote:

A snake swarm does not have a hive mind, and as such would be unaffected by the mind-affecting Color Spray.

A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind.

Beat me to it, Nefreet.

That's completely correct.. color spraying a swarm of snakes will do you no more good than it would color spraying zombies.

Sovereign Court ****

Jack Brown wrote:
deusvult wrote:

Is there any rule that says you explicitly keep your Dex bonus to Reflex saves even when it's denied to AC?

More importantly, there is nothing that says you lose your DEX bonus to Reflex saves.

Whether you're right or wrong about Dex to Reflex saves, at least on that quoted concept you're wrong.

The rules of pathfinder are proscriptive only when in context of fantasy elements that have no real-world "common sense" to fall back upon.

For example, the fireball spell doesn't benefit from a "chunky salsa" rule from overpressure when cast into a small room, because the spell doesn't explicitly call out for anything of the sort.

On the other hand, where the pathfinder rules address concepts relevant in the real world, they are descriptive rather than proscriptive. They don't try to explicitly cover the infinite things that can prop up that can be simply adjudicated by applying real world common sense. The CRB is already 500 pages, how big would it have to be if Paizo even attempted to try to codify how EVERYTHING works within the rules?

Example: The rules never explicitly cover how often one needs to use the bathroom, despite covering how often one needs to eat. But, these are real world applicible concepts, and thus the language is not proscriptive. In other words, unless the rules explicitly say something in this area, the GM has free reign to interpret and adjudicate the framework that does exist. The GM is indeed free to insist that PCs have to periodically relieve themselves, despite it not being explicitly called out in the rules. The relevance is "it doesn't say I can't rule this way.." is trumped by "it doesn't say you can, either!" only when the topic is some fantasy element that has no real world analogue.

How this lesson in semantics applies to the topic:

getting an advantage in avoiding being hurt because of one's agility and reflexes is a fairly real-world relevant topic. Thus, the rules need to explicitly state something (like whether or not there are situations where Dex bonuses can be denied to reflex saves) rather than asserting that the standard is that omission of rules allowing something constitutes a prohibitation.

TL;DR: I'm not saying it's wrong to say Dex to Reflex saves are always there. I'm also not saying it's wrong to say that by common sense, if you're denied your dex bonus to AC (and by extension CMD), then it should too Reflex Saves. Either way you want to rule it is fine, that's what I'm saying.

This post in particular is refuting "More importantly, there is nothing that says you lose your DEX bonus to Reflex saves." as being a relevant concept to the discussion. Well, it's relevant, but in that it's a faulty assumption.

To recap again, under the pathfinder rules the absence of an allowance is a prohibitation only within the context of fantasy elements of the game, not the entire game.

Sovereign Court ****

Is there any rule that says you explicitly keep your Dex bonus to Reflex saves even when it's denied to AC?

Because if not, you can certainly choose to interpret the combination as follows:

A successful feint denies the target dex bonus to AC (and by extension, REF save)
Casting an aoe spell with that target inside the aoe can be considered "an attack", as feint doesn't give the penalty versus only a melee attack.
Target is denied dex bonus on the lightning bolt REF save.

Ta da!

Sovereign Court

Deighton Thrane wrote:
In the movement during a charge. It says you must move to the closest square you can attack from. It doesn't say you have to include that square in your movement. It says you have to go to that square. Ride-By-Attack allows you to move again down the straight line you followed to charge.

It's a similar conundrum to the varying reach issue.

It's a matter of splitting hairs over the timing of when a decision has to be made. In this case, when the decision to take advantage of the post-attack charge movement R-B-A offers.

If you cannot decide before the attack, then the center square can be said to be eligible, and arguably even mandatory. But that makes RBA pointless, and is a dysfunctional way to read the rules.

If you say RBA can be 'invoked' before movement even begins, then the continued line cannot be drawn through the target itself, which means the center square(s) are not eligible. That leaves only the corner squares as legal places for the charge attack as only they would allow a continued line after declaring that the line will indeed continue.

Sovereign Court

Konbawa!

I've created a character but I had no expectation of the XP you planned, and built a Shinjo Bushi with the standard 40 points.

I also was waiting to hear more about the campaign before committing to further background detail.

I'll update the character accordingly. He'll go through the Shinjo Scout path, and probably have been sent to the Crab lands to cross-train with the Hiruma (not to the point of taking multiple schools, however)

(The 4th ed incarnation of the Shinjo Bushi school is on page 31 of Emerald Empire.. I'm presuming that'll still be the stats to use despite this campaign being set before Yokatsu's... disgrace.)

Question: I planned to declare my "gaijin gear" advantage to be a yodotai helmet. Mainly for the snazzies, but the advantage doesn't give any rules of thumb for what a non-weapon might bring, mechanically. Would it be within the bounds of reason to say that as a 5 point advantage, I'm buying a point or two of armor TN or reduction, as well as the bling?

Sovereign Court

Deighton Thrane wrote:
If there's an obstruction in the closest path you can't charge. It says so right in the movement during a charge section. Charging doesn't work the way SKR explains it. It solves all the problems with mounted charging if you run it that way, but it doesn't work by RAW.

Touche. Fair enough. You're right that you can't pick a longer charge path to bypass an obstacle and I stand corrected there.

However.

Another way to look at it is to look at Ride By Attack, as the "continuing beyond" discussion is moot without the feat.

The feat allows you to continue moving after the attack, but does not give the ability to go through the target. Thus, the "center square" is now no longer an eligible destination for the charge attack when you're going to continue moving in a straight line after the attack. And since it's not eligible, it cannot be the "closest eligible" square.

Sovereign Court

SKR's diagram GM_Arrule linked shows exactly how a straight-line charge path could proceed through one of the "corner closest squares" and continue on beyond the target.

If a GM wants to rule that the corner squares don't count as equally close as the center one, that's on them, but it's the same situation as saying higher reach cancels a lower reach on the charge. You COULD rule that way, but should you, when it's perfectly legal to rule otherwise whilst allowing the rules to work (presumably as intended).

An apples to apples comparison: in the example of SKR's left most charge path, the blue one, the three squares north of the target are 55, 55, and 60 feet away. And example does indeed go through the 60 foot square. So, on the diagonals, that wasn't the "closest", you're right.

However, if there were some feature in the way that precluded the left or middle square being the destination, then yes that rightmost square is now the "closest" legal square, and it shows how the path could continue on beyond it. (interestingly, the charge path could also have just gone through the leftmost square, presuming no obstacles, but that wasn't the point of the diagram.. it's illustrating "straight lines" that don't neatly mate with the axes on the grid.

Sovereign Court

Deighton Thrane wrote:
GM_Arrule wrote:

Maybe this would help.

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg168/seankreynolds/angled-charges.jpg

Except that that's not what the rules say, and forum posts by the devs are not binding, and don't count as FAQs. Don't get me wrong, I go by the SKR ruling in my home games because mounted charging is broken without it. And by broken, I mean does not work.

I challenge you to back this statement up.

What, exactly, does not jive with the rules? The "closest" square, by pathfinderian geometry, is actually pretty counterintuitive.

For example: E= Enemy, X = closest squares, T = charge path, 0 = open space, C=Charger's original position.

0E0
XXX
0T0
0T0
0T0
0C0

C can charge to any one of the X squares, as they're all exactly 20' away and all equally close to both the target and the point of origin(again, by pathfinder geometry, anyway)

This diagram may be made more clear by imagining the continued charge paths for the three viable X squares had they continued.

Same legend as above, but ? = continuation of charge paths beyond point of attack

?0?0?
?0?0?
?0?0?
0???0
0???0
0?E?0
0XXX0
00T00
00T00
00T00
00C00

Sovereign Court

thorin001 wrote:
What color is the sky in your world?

On my planet, the skies are blue, thanks for asking. What about yours?

Since you appear to be unfamiliar with our conventions here on earth, I'll reiterate this for you:

It's a choice about how one decides to interpret the rules governing charges to insist that an axebeak's reach prohibits a rider's non-reach charge attack.

As you and Nefreet both quoted, the rules never say the charge movement automatically stops when the maximum reach is satisfied without regard to whether or not that reach is actually being used with which to attack.

So, as I said upthread, arguing your and Nefreet's position is in fact a conscious decision about how to interpret the rules. Specifically, that the decision about what weapon with which a charge attack will be made has to be, and can only be, declared after movement is complete.

Obviously, no such rule exists. So, it's therefore also equally "correct" to interpret that the choice about what weapon to use on the charge can instead be made before the charge movement is complete.

As I and at least one other said upthread, when you can choose between the rules working and the rules not working, what benefit is there in choosing to make the rules not work?

Sovereign Court

Nefreet wrote:
Charge wrote:
You must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent.

Both mount and rider charge.

First one to reach the target wins.

The fun part is that same quote justifies what I'm saying, as well.

If the axebeak isn't attacking but the rider is, then the rider must move to the closest space within his reach during the charge movement.

The RAW can therefore also be said to prohibit the charge from stopping when the not-attacking axebeak's reach is achieved. Because the attacking rider MUST move into reach, as the rule says.

I like the example of a lance and shield, since our discussion is one of charging with while having varying threaten reaches.

If it's a knight on a horse, if he charges to use a shield bash (and possibly horse attack), you appear to also be saying those attacks fail as well if he's got a lance in the other hand. Wheras I'm saying that if the declared charge is with a weapon other than the lance, its reach isn't relevant for calculating the charge movement.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snow_Tiger wrote:
Oh so part of the fluff has been carried over from D&D, interesting. Has anyone played them different than RAW then?

I think it's less "fluff carrying over" than a proactive decision to streamline horses for pathfinder. No need to balance pros and cons; one is just simply better than the other now.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Toe Taker Tribe:

A semi-mobile tribe that found a niche within the Chelish hinterlands: preying upon halfling slave encampments.

Halfling slaves are ideal prey for numerous reasons:

1) Halflings aren't any more physically powerful than the goblins themselves.
2) Halfling slaves aren't permitted formidable weaponry!
3) Preying upon slaves brings much less hostile attention from the Chelish powers-that-be than upon the longskin peasantry.
4) Through natural selection, the Toe Taker Tribe has leaders that understand to "git when tha gittin's good" and relocate to quieter grounds before anyone is sufficiently upset to unleash the Hellknights on them.
5) Pickled Halfling Toes are the best!

Sovereign Court

Per the bestiary, heavy horses are horses with the advanced template. However it is indeed true that in older editions lighter horses had some advantages over their larger brethren.

Speed was obvious. One of the biggies that wasn't so obvious was care and maintenance.. heavy horses couldn't survive just on grazing. You had to actually tote around food for them, to boot.

Sovereign Court

thorin001 wrote:
deusvult wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Since rider and mount are both performing a charge, which is movement, then attack, the charge ends the moment either can reach their target.

There is no stipulation in the rules for choice (outside of feats, such as Ride-By Attack and Wheeling Charge).

I don't see that language in the CRB or in the mounted charge faq, and unless you know something I don't, it certainly looks like "charge movement ends when either can reach the target" is how you're choosing to interpret.

Interpretation is a conscious choice. You could also choose to interpret as I had. I'll echo Bill Dunn's sentiment: "When you can choose, why choose the dysfunctional?"

The rules are perfectly functional. The dysfunction is someone choosing a mount with a greater reach than they have. That is like claiming the rules are dysfunctional because the wizard but a 6 in Int and thus cannot cast spells.

No, the dysfunction is in saying that just because the axebeak has a long neck (or whatever reason it has reach) you can't charge someone and thump them with your longsword.

The rules don't say that the charge must end when the greater of the two reaches between mount and rider are achieved. Saying that's how you want it to work is making a choice. I'm not saying its an invalid choice, as the rules could indeed be read that way. But is it needlessly restrictive when you don't have to read them that way? It's equally viable to read that if the reach mount is opting to not attack, there's no restriction keeping the rider w/o reach from getting into reach.

Edit: Another way to illustrate choosing dysfunction:

The rules don't say when EXACTLY the decision about taking the optional attack after charge movement must take place. You're effectively saying that it has to be after movement.

But why? The rules don't say when it has to be. And it could instead been interpreted as being before or during movement.

If the rider declares that he's going to charge with his longsword, then the only attack that's impending is a 5' reach one, even from the back of an axebeak. It's dysfunctional to insist the charge has to fail because the axebeak that's not even attacking has reach.

It'd be similar to saying that if (for whatever reason) a lance-wielding rider wanted to charge and forgo the lance and have the horse kick instead (or perhaps wants to charge with a no-reach shield bash while armed with a lance), he couldn't do it. Of course he could! Even if it came down to saying he had to forgo his reach for the moment of the charge attack, obviously he could just point the tip anywhere but at the target.

Sovereign Court

The Iron Kingdoms setting for 3.0 had Gun Mages as a base class. You might look into it for inspiration; they were essentially magi that used pistols instead of melee weapons.

Sovereign Court

Nefreet wrote:

Since rider and mount are both performing a charge, which is movement, then attack, the charge ends the moment either can reach their target.

There is no stipulation in the rules for choice (outside of feats, such as Ride-By Attack and Wheeling Charge).

I don't see that language in the CRB or in the mounted charge faq, and unless you know something I don't, it certainly looks like "charge movement ends when either can reach the target" is how you're choosing to interpret.

Interpretation is a conscious choice. You could also choose to interpret as I had. I'll echo Bill Dunn's sentiment: "When you can choose, why choose the dysfunctional?"

Sovereign Court

Rhedyn wrote:

Now the conclusions were the same there, but the premise that lead to that conclusion had different meanings but were equally logical. Many of these arguments are just opinions stated as facts that work equally well just by having the exact same opinion about either fluff or rules and stating it as fact.

So close to getting the point, only to tripped up over attempting to show off. You deserve an A- in logic.

If I say "You can't have A without B, therefore they're both important" it's not fallacy just because you also can't have B without A when that was the actual point from the get-go. Put in other words: You can't consider one without the other. Whichever "one" you fit into either position. Hence, there is equal weight/importance between rules and fluff if you can't consider rules without fluff or fluff without rules.

Sovereign Court

Rules are meaningless without fluff to explain and provide context.

Therefore, fluff is at least as important as the rules.

Sovereign Court

thorin001 wrote:
Lawrence DuBois wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
If you're wielding a longsword (5ft reach) while charging on an Axebeak (10ft reach), you'd also stop at 10ft (meaning you couldn't attack).
As deusvult said, an attack is not mandatory, so you can attack with your longsword while charging on an axebeak as long as the axebeak doesn't attack.
No, while the attack is optional, the movement and restrictions on movement are not. Since the axebeak is charging it must stop at the closest square from which it can attack. That square is 10' from the target due to reach. Whether or not it attacks the movement portion of the charge is over.

Except that's overwritten because since the axebeak isn't exercising the option to attack, the rider MUST then move into range.

Sovereign Court

Jiraiya22 wrote:
So how do special movement rules work while mounted? The mounts using its actions to moves but at your initiative. Can Step Up and Strike work while mounted? Who needs to have Rhino Charge in mounted combat, the rider, the mount, or both?

That's getting into another question entirely from the original one.

But with regards to this question, the movement rules generally (but not completely) view a rider and mount as an amalgam single entity. I'm not sure that there is a definitive answer as to where the feats "must" be, but I'm of the opinion that so long as either rider or mount has a movement-related feat, then they both benefit so long as they're together as mount and rider.

Sovereign Court

While I'm waiting for a recruitment thread.. I find myself curious about how this forum's dice code accomodates the Roll & Keep mechanic.

Can the code allow for exploding dice?
Picking which resulting dice to keep? (sometimes you want to keep the lowest dice..)

Sovereign Court

A couple of factors to consider:

A recent FAQ clarified that when a mounted combatant charges, both mount and rider both acquire the "charging condition".

While charging, an attack is not mandatory.

Thus, if you have a lance, odds are you're making a choice when you charge: Do you want to attack with the lance, or with your mount? Unless your mount has reach, then it's one or the other.

If you want to charge, and attack with both the mount and rider on the same charge, then rider must attack with something that has the same reach as his mount.

Sovereign Court

There's alot of advice stating that RAW trumps reasonableness.

They'd likely also say that someone who stabs himself in the forehead with a dagger only does 1d4 damage to oneself.

If someone is looking down the barrel of a gun or down an arrow hole or such, it's well within the GM's right to say the eye is destroyed or injured. Or that when you directly expose such a vulnerable body part to damage (dunk your head in lava and "only" suffer 2d6 damage for partial exposure? Shyeahhh, right..) the GM might treat it as a automatic crit. Or even a CdG... make a fort save against the resulting damage or instantly die.

Or coming up with something else entirely. That's the point of having a GM- to adjudicate things exactly like what's asked about in the OP. Maybe you don't WANT to inflict permanent crippling effects; then you can say the damage dealt represents the PC jerking just enough at just the right time to spare the eye and take it across the cheek or such.

Citing what is or is not RAW is not going to help answer the question; the answer is "whatever the GM wants" when RAW leaves resolution to the GM.

Sovereign Court

I haven't had much interest in a PBP for Pathfinder, but been thinking about trying it out just to see.

Now, a game like L5R RPG.. I haven't played it since 1st and 2nd edition and have had a hankering to actually play 4th edition lately. Plus the rules paradigm is sooo much more compatible with PBP.. I could win in two ways at once here!

I'm ultimately flexible as to what I'd be willing to play, but my first choice is always something from the Unicorn.

Sovereign Court

Orfamay Quest wrote:
deusvult wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
The ends do not justify the means versus the ends justifying the means. This is how I see Law and Chaos.
See, I'd call that good vs evil.

Well, then, you're pretty lawful yourself personally. <evil grin>

That assessment presumes I consider myself "good" ;)

Sovereign Court ****

Hima Flametinker III wrote:
Wasting GM credit to build an Aasimar before the cut off date. I have no interest in playing him anymore. );

I did this too, only with a Tiefling as well as an Assimar. They're both level 2 and I've never played them, and don't know when or if I ever *will* play them.

Sovereign Court

TriOmegaZero wrote:
The ends do not justify the means versus the ends justifying the means. This is how I see Law and Chaos.

See, I'd call that good vs evil.

But the difference of opinion is fine, because that's what alignments really are, anyway. They mean 11 different things to any 10 gamers.

To the OP: If you're going to play a character class with alignment restrictions, the best advice you're going to get is hash out with your GM to find out what he thinks alignments mean.

Sovereign Court

It's all about the "Why".

Do you break the laws because they don't apply to you? Chaotic.

Do you break the laws because you're pretty sure you'll get away with it? Neutral.

Do you break the laws because they're invalid and you're bound to higher laws? Lawful.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The most eloquent explanation for Chaos is that it's not a pit, it's a ladder.

Granted it's arguably got an evil slant on the interpretation, and by extension that view would view Lawfulness as stagnation.

Sovereign Court

Tywin Lannister.

Sovereign Court

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one."
- Said every Lawful character ever.

"Live, and let live."
- Said every Chaotic character ever.

Lawfulness is about maintaining tradition. It's big on thinking there's a natural order to things.

Chaos is about individualism. It's about thinking it's ok to challenge the status quo.

Sovereign Court ****

BigNorseWolf wrote:

For the light signarl what about dancing lights?

Dancing lights doesn't require concentration to make the lights move or act. What you can do is summon four little orbs and then move them into different shapes: a line in front of the party for alls good, a triangle for warning, or a bar in front of the party for stop, or a square for "HEEEEEEEELP!" It apparently doesn't even take an action to do this.

Light can still be used to signal to begin the attack, even if the GM says casting has to be so loud that it's DC 0 to hear.

Have the scout carry the first pebble in a slightly open bag. When that light goes out, the scout knows the Clanks alots are inbound. Turning the signal around in that way may make the whole idea even easier to swallow for the rest of the party; they're not waiting for the rogue.. they're telling the rogue "ready or not... HERE WE COME"

Sovereign Court ****

You might consider a Tengu.

They're PFS legal, and have everything you say you're looking for except the darkvision.

Edit:

Furthermore, darkvision is not mandatory for sneaky types. Low light vision is plenty of an advantage to turn what should be low light into perfect visibility for you. But if you insist on attempting sneak attacks when your vision is still impaired, there's a feat you can take for that.

Sovereign Court ****

Having run at a few conventions and special events, I've seen that PFS offers a race boon "du jour". Currently if you earn a race boon, it'll be the Sylph mentioned upthread. Before that was Undine. Before that Ifrit. So on. I suspect it probably changes every Gen Con, and that race boon is the race boon given out until the next Gen Con. I got a dhampir when dhampirs were the race "du jour".

If you're looking for a specific race boon, there is the auction route.

A more reliable way to acquire the current race boon "du jour" is to strike up a relationship with your local Venture Officers. That's how I got my Dhampir boon- running a special event and it wasn't even at a Convention.

Sovereign Court ****

BigNorseWolf wrote:
deusvult wrote:


Presumably you're not RIGHT BEHIND the NPC when you're signaling for the attack to begin. If you want to go down that route, there's Silent Spells... but yeah. Generally send word for the attack to begin from a little ways off to make perception checks challenging to hear.

Thats one of the thousand little problems of DM variation involved in sneaking anywhere. How close can you be to someone and cast?

Verbal (V): A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell). A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance of spoiling any spell with a verbal component that he tries to cast.

A strong voice to me says dc 0 to hear, which is probably easier than sir clanksalots stealth check.

Well, you're ultimately right in that table variation will set the DC, which is a shame. It seems like something as basic a notion as "noticing spellcasting" should be covered. Technically invisibility is a flat +20 to the DC, even for sound effects. There's also distraction and environmental effects to cite for pumping your DC even higher.

But rather than engage in rules chicanery with the GM, it's better to just explain what you're trying to do: "I'm not trying to one shot one kill the NPC... all I'm trying to do is begin the encounter on the map away from the rest of the team, ideally with the NPC between us".

That sort of stealth/scouting is pretty dang reasonable most of the time, and the GM will likely not look for ways to tell you that the rules say you can't pull it off.

If you have a GM that says "Look, the scenario says the PCs start here on the map, so that's where you start. ALL of you.." then there's not much you can do but endure the scenario and hope for better next time.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Up until Pathfinder, the Cure series of spells were Necromantic. Necromancy is the magic of life and death, afterall.

I still say writers got it wrong to change them to "conjuration".

Sovereign Court ****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jack of Nothing wrote:
...Is dabbling in GMing worth getting into just for the boons?...

Unless you plan on GMing at Conventions, you're not likely to get a race boon by merely "dabbling" at GMing.

So I'd answer that quoted question as probably being "No."

However, I'd add that it is worth dabbling behind the GM screen because of the positive benefits it brings to your PFS circle.

1) Any game you GM, a regular GM gets to play.

2) Seeing other people's ways of doing things is a great way to learn how to GM better, yourself. Even veteran GMs will learn how to GM better by watching you, even if it's your first crack at it.

3) If nothing else, you get a risk-free, full reward chronicle to assign to one of your characters.

4) Try it. You might find out you like it.

1 to 50 of 1,303 << 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.