erian_7's page

Moro wrote:

The bolded part would be why I have an issue with this interpretation. It effectively makes Trip attacks useless as a control mechanic.

I fail to see why in the example you were replying to. If he moves, and is tripped, he has to use his other action to stand. Thus he cannot move. The only difference with prone targets is that tripping a person while they stand does not waste their action like tripping a moving person does.

Agreed, and I'm not even sure what you mean by an interpretation? If you specifically mean the part in bold is wrong, I'm unsure how you interpret the following rule (that's been in place since 3.5):

If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).

The rules clearly state that the human in my example should have a Move or Standard action left. Are you saying this is incorrect, and if so could you elaborate?

Except for the whole "spells can be interrupted during the action but you are either standing or prone all the time with no period where you are getting up where an opponent may be able to trip you again" part.

The effects of damage from an AoO during spellcasting are specifically covered in the rules:

Injury: If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you're casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting if it comes between the time you started and the time you complete a spell (for a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or more) or if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as an attack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action).

Emphasis mine.

Alternatively, "you are either armed or disarmed all the time with no period where you are drawing your weapon/retreiving an item where an opponent may be able to disarm you, despite the fact that retrieving that item is what initiates the AoO."

Drawing a weapon does not provoke an AoO, so I see no relevance for the discussion. A more relevant example would be loading a crossbow. If you disarm the target after it provokes, then the loading is indeed interrupted since the crossbow is no longer in hand.

For items (including weapons stored in packs--this is not Drawing a Weapon), if you attempt a disarm as the AoO when a target tries to retrieve a stored item, just as with the crossbow you can disarm the item since disarm targets "one item it is carrying" and the rules do not specify "carrying" as being in hand. This is one area where the PRD lost a bit, as they removed the Grabbing Items section that is present in the SRD. In truth, these rules aren't specifically necessary since the mechanics for disarm already allow grabbing an item, but I personally think leaving this section in place would have helped folks understand this better.

You can use a disarm action to snatch an item worn by the target. If you want to have the item in your hand, the disarm must be made as an unarmed attack.

If the item is poorly secured or otherwise easy to snatch or cut away the attacker gets a +4 bonus. Unlike on a normal disarm attempt, failing the attempt doesn’t allow the defender to attempt to disarm you. This otherwise functions identically to a disarm attempt, as noted above.

You can’t snatch an item that is well secured unless you have pinned the wearer (see Grapple). Even then, the defender gains a +4 bonus on his roll to resist the attempt.

So, there are actually mechanics to cover the items in question.

I have a question for those of you who support the argument that RAW make trip locking impossible.

How you adjudicate a round in which an AoO is provoked by a normal move, and the Trip Attack is successful? Walk me through it, please.

Assume a human with a 30' Movement rate moves past an orc.

The human moves 10', entering a square threatened by the orc, then continues his move.

When the human moves out of the threatened square, this action immediately provokes and AoO.

The orc uses his AoO and successfully trips the human.

The human is now Prone. The human had 20' left in his Move action, but can no longer use that movement as he is prone. He has effectively "lost" the rest of that Move action.

He has a remaining Standard or Move action, and could actually stand from prone (as a Move action). This would provoke another AoO from the orc (these are two separate opportunities for AoO), although the orc would need Combat Reflexes in order to take advantage of this second AoO.

It absolutely makes 0 sense to say that the AoO happens before the guy starts to stand up. None what so ever.

Nowhere does it even state that in the rules...it very clearly says it interrupts.

I'm assuming you've read the rest of this thread. If not, doing so will be beneficial.

To your statement that the rules clearly say it interrupts--please quote the rule that states this. Rather, the AoO rules specifically state, "immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn." The only mention of interruption is in the statement "An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round." This does not say the AoO interrupts the action itself, but rather the flow of actions. That means where normally you could not act on my turn, you can if I provoke an AoO. Unless you do something with your AoO that prevents such, my actions resume immediately after you complete the AoO.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

I was wondering if it were possible to have a PRPG stat block page? It woudld make things cool for us GMs.

+2, having recently worked on an adventure with a full party of high-level NPCs facing the PCs!

Oh yes, I forgot to mention that (another item eaten in my lost post...)

I am indeed working on a statblock page. The centralization I've done to make the L and P sheets stay in synch helped out a lot toward making this an easy option

Reread your posts. If you don't see the condescension in them, versus simply stating what the rules of the game are (this is the rules forum after all), well, I guess we have different standards for communication.

It's fine if you don't like the rule, and many folks have said many times in this very thread that a GM can change it as he sees fit. Not liking a rule and simply arguing against it for that reason doesn't make any sense here.

It looks like the additions you made on _11 finally threw you over the cell format limit for Excel 2003. I remember heroforge running into this back when I was working on it. I also remember it being more work than it's worth to try to eliminate the formats. So I would just suggest that you leave _10 available for those who don't have a modern version of excel.

Meh, it happens from time to time--I rebuild a few sheets and Excel plays nice again...

Also, I noticed with this post that my last response here didn't "take" apparently! In summary, I noted that I've corrected all problems reported to date (except the character limit and Intelligence enhancement bonus), and am working to incorporate the various current errata. I also rebuilt more items on the Front pages to ensure changes aren't only made on the L vs. P formats.

I'll be posting after I get the rest of the errata in place...

Ah, gamism has been invoked, and so we all lose for being such silly people (of course, D&D and it's iterations are known as the pinnacle of gamist approaches...). A much better approach, then, would be to work out the exact physics of how tripping occurs and develop a set of tables, checks, calculations, and cyphers so we can make sure this stays realistic?

Let's leave the name calling out of this please. We aren't here to debate game theory. A rules question was asked, and we've provided the answer from the rules.

Of course, there is a way this can be solved for folks that want trip-locking in the game--make a feat.

Trip-Lock
Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes, Greater Trip
Benefit: Whenever a Prone target that you threaten attempts to stand, you may attempt to trip that target as an Immediate action. A successful trip interrupts the target's attempt to stand, causing the target to become Prone and also lose the Move action it was using to stand.

Making this an Immediate action allows it to act as an interrupt while also providing a cost (in addition to the feat) to keep this tactic under control in the game.

Option 3 would be one person rolls the Init d20, then the DM just applies each person's init modifier. You end up with fast people still being fast and slow people still being slow, with minimal delay to the game. So long as you don't require folks to post in init order, summarize events logically based on stated actions, and allow lower init players to redo actions if something happens that would affect their previous action, you should be good to go.

Okay, just checking due to the confusion of the map situation. I was just updating the map with each post update I was doing.

So, what should I have done differently this combat?

I usually updated the map at the start of each init cycle.

It makes no sense to rule it any other way, really. An attack of opportunity is PROVOKED, meaning that something initiates it. The character gets knocked down, and rather then crawl away and try to stand up somewhere safe they try to leap up and get knocked down again.

The mechanics of a role playing game are notlike the mechanics of a video game, or most other forms of interactive entertainment. Being Prone is not JUST a status effect in this game. In this case it means being knocked on your rear, and I defy anyone to make a rational arguement that you can't knock down someone trying to stand up.

Even mechanically this is weak (see the quoted post about readied actions, which technically happen before the action they respond to).

What you are talking about is a Readied action, specifically with the trigger "when this target completes his Move action to stand, I trip him." If you worded it sloppily, something like "if the target tries to stand, I trip him" then the Readied action might indeed occur at the start of the action to stand. Readied actions do not always occur before the action they respond to, they occur when the stated trigger occurs. This is a very important distinction from AoO. Compare the language for a Readied action with that of AoO from my earlier posts:

Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.

Readied actions specifically call out possibly interrupting another character, and specifically call out that the Readied action occurs based on a specific condition, not a specific action.

What is also great is that there is absolutely no way to prevent someone from standing up whatsoever. They could be surrounded by trip fighters with whips and they still get to stand. All the whips can do sting or disarm. Unless they are drawing a weapon, in which case they are disarmed before they draw, and proceed to now draw. So nothing can prevent them from drawing a weapon, either.

See above. If a group of trippers want to keep a target down, all they have to do is Ready actions with the appropriate condition.

Well I read that but say someone triggers an AoO, you choose to trip with your AoO, the successful trip would then trigger ANOTHER AoO for you to take advantage of? That doesn't seem right at all... Is this really the case?

That is correct, but you'd need to have Combat Reflexes to have another AoO available to you. This is covered under the rules for making multiple AoO against the same target.

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

Emphasis mine...

So here is the list of Move Actions that provoke an AoO:

Move
Control a Frightened Mount
Load a crossbow or hand crossbow
Move a heavy object
Pickup an item
Sheathe a weapon
Stand up from prone
Retrieve a stored item

So you are trying to say that by RAW only ONE of those provocations is NOT interrupted and unable to be completed by a Trip Attack?

That is correct. See my last post on the logical flow of AoO mechanics. Note that the action to move a heavy object would be limited in how far you could move said object, but that does not prevent the Move action. If you believe otherwise, I'll need to see a quote stating that said specific action cannot be taken while prone.

The 3.5 SRD is obsolete.

By the RAW in the PFSRD, you can attempt to stand, granting an AoO. I won't argue that you no longer have the prone condition, but having the prone condition does not disqualify the chance for a Trip attack.

AoO Trip resolves, leaving you prone with your movement interrupted, just as if your normal movement were interrupted, and you still have the prone condition.

The movement is not interrupted--you wasted that trip attempt to make a prone target prone. The target then continues his turn, since you tripped him before he did anything (i.e. because AoO happens immediately). You are confusing interrupted movement with an interrupted Move action. Logical progression is this:

1. Target starts to use Move action to stand, triggering AoO
2. AoO occurs immediately (before the Move action)
3. Target continues Move action if possible

If your only action is to trip the target, that does not prevent the Move action from continuing.

If you want to trip that target after the Move action, you need to use a Ready action.

erian_7 wrote:

Trip has one effect--it renders the target prone.

This is where your argument breaks down. Trip has two effects - it renders the target prone and interrupts their move action.

Unless you are now going to rule that if a character is tripped during their normal move action, that is. Then you are opening up an entirely new can of worms.

No, this is where you fail to apply the mechanics of actions in the PRD. Show me a quote from the PRD that states a trip interrupts a Move action. I'll help out with a quote of the trip mechanics:

You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack. You can only trip an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Trip feat, or a similar ability, initiating a trip provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack exceeds the target's CMD, the target is knocked prone. If your attack fails by 10 or more, you are knocked prone instead. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional leg it has. Some creatures—such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures—cannot be tripped.

I don't see any reference to interrupting a Move action being one of the effects of trip. Of course, depending on the trigger for an AoO, it might interrupt a Move action, but only if that action has an opportunity for interruption. "Normal movement" is not equivalent to standing from prone. "Normal movement" can involve a situation that provokes an AoO after the action has started but before it completes. Standing from prone does not have this in between state. If you believe that it does, show it from the rules.

The 3.5 SRD is obsolete.

By the RAW in the PFSRD, you can attempt to stand, granting an AoO. I won't argue that you no longer have the prone condition, but having the prone condition does not disqualify the chance for a Trip attack.

AoO Trip resolves, leaving you prone with your movement interrupted, just as if your normal movement were interrupted, and you still have the prone condition.

The movement is not interrupted--you wasted that trip attempt to make a prone target prone. The target then continues his turn, and since you tripped him before he did anything (i.e. because AoO happens immediately). You are confusing interrupted movement with an interrupted Move action. Logical progression is this:

1. Target starts to use Move action to stand, triggering AoO
2. AoO occurs immediately (before the Move action)
3. Target continues Move action if possible

If your only action is to trip the target, that does not prevent the Move action from continuing.

If you want to trip that target after the Move action, you need to use a Ready action.

erian_7 wrote:

Trip has one effect--it renders the target prone.

This is where your argument breaks down. Trip has two effects - it renders the target prone and interrupts their move action.

Unless you are now going to rule that if a character is tripped during their normal move action, that is. Then you are opening up an entirely new can of worms.

No, this is where you fail to understand the mechanics of actions in the PRD. Show me a quote from the PRD that states a trip interrupts a Move action. I'll help out with a quote of the trip mechanics:

You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack. You can only trip an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Trip feat, or a similar ability, initiating a trip provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack exceeds the target's CMD, the target is knocked prone. If your attack fails by 10 or more, you are knocked prone instead. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional leg it has. Some creatures—such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures—cannot be tripped.

Quote:

I don't see any reference to interrupting a Move action being one of the effects of trip. Of course, depending on the trigger for an AoO, it might interrupt a Move action, but only if that action has an opportunity for interruption. "Normal movement" is not equivalent to standing from prone. "Normal movement" can involve a situation that provokes an AoO after the action has started but before it completes. Standing from prone does not have this in between state. If you believe that it does, show it from the rules.

Quote:

All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.

Also, since some people really do want to stick to a purely RAW interpretation, the above would be incorrect, because nowhere in the RAW for a Trip attempt does it say that you cannot trip a prone target.

So if you want to apply logic and RAI to one side, then you need to apply it all around.

Note that you're quoting the d20 3.5 FAQ, not the folks on this forum.

You can indeed use a trip combat maneuver if you like for the AoO provoked, but it's pointless to do so. Trip has one effect--it renders the target prone. Since your target is already prone, your trip attempt has no effect. So, you effectively just wasted an AoO to do nothing, when you could have done something that actually has an effect...

Yes, and since standing up from prone is a move action, it can be interrupted at any point during the movement required to stand.

Logically, movement is required to stand.
Movement can be interrupted, and in the case of a Trip, movement is ended and the target becomes prone.

Logically, perhaps, but that's not what the rules say--"immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then...complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn." This is not about real-world logic, but rather game mechanics.

You're stating that the interruption can occur any time during the movement, but that is not the case. It occurs "immediately" when the AoO is provoked. The example you use with movement is not the same--the target has already moved 10' of a 30' Move action before triggering the AoO. Keep in mind it is not the target's entire Move action that provoked the AoO, but rather the exact 5' movement that took him out of a threatened square. Specific actions trigger AoO, and the AoO occurs immediately after that trigger.

The game also doesn't account for you "interrupting" someones movement action. Are you telling me that if a character moves 10', and provokes an AOO, that I cannot trip him there because his action isn't "complete"? The rules already DO allow for "in-between" states of being in nebulous times between the beginning of an action and the end.

The mechanics actually do account for interrupting an action--you simply have to consider what actually provoked the AoO. For your movement example, the move provokes and AoO when the target leaves a threatened square--the AoO triggers at that point and you could indeed trip the target as the AoO. Consider the language as follows:

1. an attack of opportunity is provoked
   
2. immediately resolve the attack of opportunity
   
3. continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn)

From this, you can see the order compensates for an interrupted action in step 3. If the target took a Move action first to go 10' of a 30' move and was then tripped, continuing the turn means it can then take a Standard or Move action. The first Move action is effectively interrupted, because the target cannot continue the move (since he's prone).

Given that it was definately the consensus that AoO trip-locking did work in 3.5 (hence the wild popularity of trip builds), may I ask what Pathfinder changed that appears to have swayed the opinion of D&D community so drastically?

Is the wording for the trip maneuver or attacks of opportunity significantly different in Pathfinder?

You are working from an assumption here that this was largely accepted. I do not believe that assumption is correct. The ruling that you cannot trip an already prone target was actually even stated in the D&D 3.5 FAQ:

When a character gets up from prone, when does the attack of opportunity take place? When he is still prone? When he is standing? Can the attacker choose when to attack? In one case, the attacker can get a +4 bonus to hit. In the other, he can make another trip attack.

All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.

The wording for order of operations actually hasn't even changed:

An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).

An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).

Here's a question - if you wore +3 leather armor with bracers +8, would your AC go up by 11? You get the armor bonus of +8 from the bracers, and an armor enhancement bonus of +3 from the leather. No stacking problems there, though surely it's not an intended use.

This is a fairly common misconception--there is no such thing as a +3 Enhancement bonus to AC. An Enhancement bonus always raises the Armor bonus to which it is related. See the details in this post:

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/armorBonusStackingOverlappingQuestion&page=1#13

So, Leather Armor +3 provides a +5 Armor bonus, not a +2 Armor bonus and a +3 Enhancement bonus. And so, the character would have a +8 Armor bonus in total, from the bracers.

Side line, I was wondering why you keep posting these in the Compatible Products from Other Publishers forum? This area is specifically for folks to "Discuss products by publishers other than Paizo produced under the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility License." Your Importing from 3.5 questions are much more appropriate in the Conversions forum, and you'd likely get more responses there...

Technically speaking though flanking has nothing to do with all around vision or 360 situational awareness.

Note that all-around vision is a specific extraordinary ability that negates flanking (thus my reference to the gibbering mouther, which has said ability...the xorn is another OGC example). For these creatures at least, it is indeed about being able to see on all sides rather than having a safe place to move.

For the OP, you could consider adding a feat for All-Around Vision, with the requirement of having 2+ heads. Then you can upgrade creatures and have a specific cost.

The gibbering mouther, which has all-around vision.

Long holiday weekend coupled with both of our kids getting sick took me out from Thursday through today...

Howdy folks! As I saw my sheet invoked in the discussion, I thought I might voice a perspective on things. I put out my Excel-based* character sheet under the Open Game License and Paizo's Community Use Policy. So long as those are in existence (and from Lisa's comments it looks like that should be a good long while!) I'll keep chugging along. If you are looking for free character generators, try it out, or else look to Ogre's work, sCoreGen, etc. as they all provide very nice features as well.

However, I can tell you from direct experience that if you want every piece of OGC from Paizo products in a tool (one of my goals), that is a lot of work. I happen to make a good wage doing other things and also enjoy digging into the rules automation as it helps me understand the game better. So, providing my sheet for free is no problem. I also work directly in the software development industry, and so I know that if you want quality software, you are going to pay for it. This is not an issue of whether the content is open or not, but rather how you want to handle that cost. Some people pay for it directly with cash, i.e. you buy a product like HeroLab. Some people pay for it with labor, i.e. you make your own tool. Some people do a mix of these, i.e. buy the base tool, then enter your own data. If you don't want to take option 2 or 3 because you don't have the time/skill, then option 1 is a very reasonable route. I don't begrudge Lone Wolf (or any company) their right to a profit--they've got to make a living somehow! In fact, I'm sure I'll own a copy of HeroLab in the near future, simply because I believe in supporting the companies that support my RPG of choice.

In the end, look at your options and go with what works best for your cost approach.

*It should be very OpenOffice compatible as well--if it's not please let me know the specifics!

I do a fair bit with Excel (see my profile for my Excel-based character sheet). I don't have time to pull all the GMG data out right now, but if you (or anyone) can do so and put it in a simple table format, I could build an automation tool for this very easily.

That is what the rules say, though--it specifically does not say it is an Enhancement bonus to AC, but rather that the bonus type is Enhancement.

Consider the two relevant sections of the rules for this, and determine what conclusion satisfies both sections. These are:

Armor Class

Your Armor Class (AC) represents how hard it is for opponents to land a solid, damaging blow on you. It's the attack roll result that an opponent needs to achieve to hit you. Your AC is equal to the following:

10 + armor bonus + shield bonus + Dexterity modifier + other modifiers

Note that armor limits your Dexterity bonus, so if you're wearing armor, you might not be able to apply your whole Dexterity bonus to your AC (see Table: Armor and Shields).

Sometimes you can't use your Dexterity bonus (if you have one). If you can't react to a blow, you can't use your Dexterity bonus to AC. If you don't have a Dexterity bonus, your AC does not change.

Other Modifiers: Many other factors modify your AC.

Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides.

and

Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses).

The combat section (the first quote) provides the rules for calculating armor class. The formula includes Armor, Shield, Dexterity, and Other. Looking at the Other Modifiers notes, it clearly states that for calculating armor class, Enhancement bonuses "increase the armor bonus it provides." It doesn't increase AC directly, but rather indirectly through the Armor bonus.

Reading the section under magic items, then, you have to keep in mind this rule from the Combat section. So, it says "Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses..." This gives you specific information for using the armor class calculation formula. The bonus is not of the types Deflection, Natural Armor, Dodge, or Size--these all have separate notes from Enhancement bonuses. So, all that statement is saying is what type of bonus the magic armor has. Reading further, we get the following rules:

1. never rises above +5
   
2. stacks with regular armor bonuses
   
3. stacks with shield bonuses
   
4. stacks with magic shield enhancement bonuses

None of these conflict with what is stated in the Combat section. And specifically rule #2 above says these bonuses "stack with regular armor bonuses." If the Enhancement bonus provided isn't considered an Armor bonus, this statement would not be necessary since two different bonus types always stack. There are basically two sub-types of Armor bonuses, "regular" and Enhancement.

Now, I suppose folks could argue differently if they just consider the Magic Item section, but that contradicts the rules in the Combat section. If my argument fits both sections, it seems illogical to me to try and come to some other conclusion that puts the two sections in conflict.

The wording in the regular armor section is just telling you what type of bonus a +1 chain shirt has. If they didn't specify, then it would be an untyped bonus and would stack with, say, a magic vestment spell. You can actually think of it the way you have it worded--they are two separate Armor bonuses that stack and this is then an exception to the general rule that Armor bonuses don't stack. But it is still an Armor bonus. I don't know of any direct Enhancement bonus to armor class, anywhere*. Enhancement bonuses always affect something else, and thus are that "something else" for all intents and purposes.

The negation of one "armor" based on a greater bonus coming from another "armor" is only specifically mentioned in the bracers of armor description. I do see that SGG applies this same restriction to their feat in question, but I don't see any basis in the core rules for mage armor canceling out the entire effects of a suit of armor. By my ruling, you'd just end up with whichever higher Armor bonus to AC, plus any other effects of the armor. I do think it's a perfectly reasonable thing for SGG to apply to their feat, if that is the mechanical balance necessary to ensure it stays reasonable.**

*The text of rhino hide does state it grants a "+2 enhancement bonus to AC." This is legacy wording carried over from the 3.5 SRD, and in my opinion represents sloppy writing. I see no grounds for it providing a direct bonus to AC, rather than an Enhancement bonus to Armor as with standard +2 hide armor.

**I think Web of Steel is a very cool feat. It allows for character concepts that can have reasonable AC without being wrapped in full plate at higher levels. As with any 3PP material (or indeed any non-core Paizo material), the GM needs to ensure it is used reasonably. If it "breaks" your game somehow, fix the break and move on...

Cross post from the other thread...

Enhancement bonuses basically become the bonus type of whatever they enhance. That section in Magic Armor makes sure folks know that the Armor bonuses just increase. This is the same for, say, an Amulet of Natural Armor--the bonus it provides is an Enhancement bonus to your Natural Armor bonus. An Enhancement bonus to the same stat won't stack, so you can't have two Enhancement bonuses to your Armor. This is the reason a character can have multiple Enhancement bonuses--so long as they modify separate bonuses they all apply. If the bonuses stayed as they type Enhancement for armor class, then the Enhancement bonus from a +1 chain shirt and the Enhancement bonus from a +1 amulet of natural armor wouldn't stack to increase the character's AC. I think considering it this way might help folks understand how those Enhancement bonuses interact.

That's not a specific contradiction, just a clarification to how the Enhancement works. Enhancement bonuses basically become the bonus type of whatever they enhance. That section in Magic Armor makes sure folks know that the Armor bonuses just increase. This is the same for, say, an Amulet of Natural Armor--the bonus it provides is an Enhancement bonus to your Natural Armor bonus. An Enhancement bonus to the same stat won't stack, so you can't have two Enhancement bonuses to your Armor. This is the reason a character can have multiple Enhancement bonuses--so long as they modify separate bonuses they all apply. If the bonuses stayed as they type Enhancement for armor class, then the Enhancement bonus from a +1 chain shirt and the Enhancement bonus from a +1 amulet of natural armor wouldn't stack to increase the character's AC. I think considering it this way might help folks understand how those Enhancement bonuses interact.

Just posted on another thread...

I've seen a lot of discussions missing that enhancement bonuses to armor actually increase the Armor bonus (and thus don't stack with other Armor bonuses).

This is in the Combat section, specifically, "Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides." This is the reference Hexcaliber mentions.

A +5 chain shirt does not have a +4 Armor bonus and a +5 Enhancement bonus. It has a +9 Armor bonus.

I've seen a lot of discussions missing that enhancement bonuses to armor actually increase the Armor bonus (and thus don't stack with other Armor bonuses).

This is in the Combat section, specifically, "Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides."

A +5 chain shirt does not have a +4 Armor bonus and a +5 Enhancement bonus. It has a +9 Armor bonus.

The rule you want is under Intelligence in the Getting Started section, specifically, "...your character always gets at least 1 skill point per level."

True. An 18 Str can lift 600 lb. max. The strongman competitions, from what I've seen, lift in the range of 1100-1200 lb. That would be a Str of 22-23.

Besides adventures what is the best place to get info on the pathfinder world itself.

At present, the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting, which will be updated with the coming release of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: World Guide—The Inner Sea. Buy the latter. Beyond that, you get down to specific focused books that are found throughout the Pathfinder Campaign Setting product line. There are some shorter (and sometimes more player-focused/friendly) books in the Pathfinder Companion product line. You can also find lots of information online at the PathfinderWiki.

Note that "by the book" (i.e., the height and weight charts in the core rules) a 6'2" human weighs 200 lb. (base height of 58" + 16" to get to 74" total. Base weight of 120 + (16 x 5) = 200). Requiring him to be in this range is reasonable. Anything else is pretty much micromanaging IMHO.

Erian listens to Gaelen and Polson voice their concerns. "Now Gaelen, you surely see the irony in cautioning any diplomacy with the kobolds while simultaneously advocating their extermination? I wonder, if you had lived a life under the shadow of fear that bigger creatures were always looking to exterminate you, how would you react to such creatures?" With a shrug, he adds, "Besides, if you're truly just interested in coin, then brokering a deal with the kobolds is far more likely to result in immediate profit with less personal cost or risk. Unless you plan on hanging around here for years to see if the kobolds break their word, then it shouldn't really matter how trustworthy they are longterm..."

One of the best treatments of this topic I ever saw for d20 was The Book of Distinctions and Drawbacks from Cryptosnark Games. The publisher went out of business, but that PDF is a thorough set of rules covering everything from flaws to advantages to random background generation. The author is up-front in noting that a GM must take care with flaws, and only allow the more RP-related ones with players that will actually use them properly.

Okay, first list. This is all of my "generic" D&D material. There are a few items I know I own, but can't locate (which leds me down the "now did I lend that to someone" road). All items I put my hands on tonight are marked with an "x"

x … 11641 … Dungeons & Dragons Adventure Game
x … 11639 … Dungeon Master's Screen 3.0
x … 11642 … Character Record Sheets 3.0
… 11640 … The Sunless Citadel
… 88575 … The Forge of Fury
x … 86896 … Hero Builder's Guidebook
x … 11760 … Diablo II: Diablerie
x … 88061 … Sword and Fist: A Guidebook to Monks and Fighters
x … 88062 … The Speaker in the Dreams
x … 88232 … The Standing Stone
x … 88234 … Defenders of the Faith: A Guidebook to Clerics and Paladins
x … 88237 … Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil
… 88238 … Tome and Blood: A Guidebook to Wizards and Sorcerers
x … 88239 … Heart of Nightfang Spire
x … 88242 … Manual of the Planes
x … 88243 … Enemies and Allies
x … 88667 … Deep Horizon
x … 88668 … Song and Silence: A Guidebook to Bards and Rogues
x … 11831 … Diablo II: To Hell and Back
x … 88163 … Lord of the Iron Fortress
x … 88164 … Masters of the Wild: A Guidebook to Barbarians, Druids, and Rangers
x … 88167 … Bastion of Broken Souls
x … 88165 … Deities and Demigods
x … 88166 … Stronghold Builder's Guidebook
x … 88168 … Book of Challenges, Dungeon Rooms, Puzzles, and Traps
x … 88169 … Epic Level Handbook
x … 88268 … Monster Manual II
x … 88161 … Book of Vile Darkness
x … 88158 … Savage Species
x … 88159 … Arms & Equipment Guide
x … 88661 … Fiend Folio
x … 88566 … Ghost Walk
x … 17524 … Player's Handbook Edition 3.5
x … 17752 … Dungeong Master's Guide Edition 3.5
x … 17755 … Monster Manual Edition 3.5
x … 96582 … Minatures Handbook
x … 88026 … Book of Exalted Deeds
x … 17664 … Complete Warrior
x … 17668 … Draconomicon
… 88586 … Deluxe Dungeon Master's Screen
x … 88595 … Deluxe Player Character Sheets
x … 88156 … Unearthed Arcana
x … 88648 … Map Folio One
x … 96666 … Expanded Psionics Handbook
x … 88036 … Complete Divine
x … 17920 … Planar Handbook
x … 96569 … Map Folio Two
x … 96567 … Races of Stone
x … 17758 … Frostburn
x … 17921 … Monster Manual III
x … 17925 … Complete Arcane
x … 17927 … Map Folio 3-D
x … 17737 … Races of Destiny
x … 17729 … Complete Adventurer
x … 86317 … Dungeon Master's Guide II
x … 86090 … Heroes of Battle
x … 88922 … Heroes of Horror
x … 17741 … Lords of Madness: The Book of Aberrations
x … 88579 … Magic of Incarnum
x … 17928 … Races of the Wild
x … 17739 … Sandstorm
x … 88598 … Spell Compendium
… 17867 … Stormwrack
x … 17862 … Weapons of Legacy
x … 95369 … Races of the Dragon
x … 95378 … Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords

Next up, Eberron. Same format:

x … 86400 … Eberron Campaign Setting
x … 86410 … Shadows of the Last War
x … 86420 … Sharn: City of Towers
x … 86430 … Whispers of the Vampire's Blade
x … 17869 … Explorer's Handbook
x … 17868 … Five Nations
x … 17730 … Grasp of Emberald's Claw (Adventure)
x … 88291 … Magic of Eberron
x … 17745 … Races of Eberron
x … 95368 … Player's Guide to Eberron
x … 95363 … Voyage of the Golden Dragon (Adventure)
… 95372 … Secrets of Xen'drik
… 95381 … Faiths of Eberron
x … 95380 … Dragonmarked

Forgotten Realms:

x … 88099 … Monstrous Compendium: Monsters of Faerun
x … 88236 … Forgotten Realms Campagin Setting (Hardcover Book)
x … 88241 … Magic of Faerun
x … 88670 … Lords of Darkness
x … 88686 … Forgotten Realms Dungeon Master's Screen
x … 88643 … Faiths and Pantheons
x … 88567 … Silver Marches
x … 88578 … Races of Faerun
x … 17665 … Unapproachable East
x … 88581 … Underdark
x … 88647 … Player's Guide to Faerun
x … 96566 … Serpent Kingdoms
x … 17929 … Shining South
x … 17872 … Champions of Ruin
x … 88292 … Champions of Valor
x … 88162 … City of Splendors: Waterdeep
x … 17738 … Lost Empires of Faerun
x … 11634 … Into the Dragon's Lair
x … 11710 … Pool of Radiance: Attack on Myth Drannor
x … 88574 … City of the Spider Queen
x … 88446 … Sons of Gruumsh
x … 95394 … The Twilight Tomb

And finally, some miscellaneous stuff:

x … 86990 … Dragonlance Campaign Setting
x … 12015 … Oriental Adventures
x … 88293 … The Wheel of Time RPG - Prophecies of the Dragon

I made a few assumptions for knowledge based on the check results. If anything seems out of sorts we can modify.

Erian says, in a somewhat scholarly tone, "Mites are evil-natured little fey, lovers of darkness that aren't overly fond of dwarves, from what I recall. They are fond of spiders, scorpions, and other poisonous creepy-crawlers, however, and I'd expect where you find mites, you'll find something ready to sink fangs into flesh."

He pauses (one might get the sense he's giving everyone time to take notes), then continues, "Now, as for kobolds, they are as likely as any sentient race to take gems, coins, and the like. However, they are also renowned builders of traps and most tribes revere dragons in one form or another."

It seems I'm on an entirely opposite timeframe for posting from everyone else...

A few dice rolls to see what Erian might know of the kobolds and mites...

Knowledge (nature) 1d20 + 7 ⇒ (9) + 7 = 16
Bardic Knowledge 1d20 + 3 ⇒ (12) + 3 = 15

I was just about to suggest Meetup.com as well. I'm the organizer for our local group in Birmingham, AL and we have over 200 members. Most of those folks don't come directly to our monthly meetings (we couldn't hold more than 30 or so!), but they use the connections to work out regular local games.

Thanks for the feedback. I was wondering about the lot vs. single sales. I used to do a great deal of eBay (actually that's where most of these came from) but haven't in the last 2-3 years.

And I'll definitely post things here fist--I love my Paizo friends best!

I plan on keeping some of the books that are just nice in and of themselves...things like the Draconomicon.

Erian is always up for exploration (which for him will involve a detailed survey of each area for his maps) and in the process gathering intel. So, I'd say yes to 2 of the 4! We've got a few other leads with the wyrm, boar, and kobolds, and the latter might lead to a bit of intel itself (assuming we can keep the party from killing kobolds randomly...). So, perhaps we find out from Oleg where the kobolds are in general and map our way there?

Where it say Weapon Finesse applies to Unarmed Strike?

Unarmed strikes are treated as Light weapons.

See the Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons section under Weapons in the Equipment chapter.

ok, I get it now

but the kama flurry of blows +5?

+5 (BAB) -2 (Fob) +1 (Str) = 4

what gives?

Weapon Finesse applies to the kama as well (it covers all Light weapons).

Weapon Finesse--he uses Dex mod rather than Str mod for unarmed strike attack rolls.

So, +5 (BAB) +2 (Dex) -2 (FoB) = +5

For standard unarmed strike +3 (BAB) +2 (Dex) = +5

Tweaked my last post, as it seems to have come in right at the same time as the GM...And that die roll was for Diplomacy, so I added a note to that effect.

I was falling away from WotC by the time MIC was released, so it's actually one of the books I don't have.

I'll put together a full list, but it's pretty much everything from 2000 to 2007 or so. They are all in good shape. As for prices, that's one of the areas where I'm looking for some input--any good source of comparable expected sale prices?