wraithstrike's page

I did not see that in the glossary. It says the pinned creature can not move. It does not say the pinner can not move them.

Dr.Deth stealth does make you lose dex by RAW. I figured it out a few days ago. I can provide a link if you like. As of now everyone is agreeing with me or at least nobody is disagreeing with me.

The only reason I can think of is for overall appeal and function. Which is to say that the dimensional assault feats aren't terribly useful for most casters and the feat reads like it was designed for monks and the caster possibility feels like the afterthought to me. One could claim that the inclusion of the cast dimension door perquisite could be used as the inclusion value, but then why would they say cast. I would say because cast is typically the word used to describe the activation of spell like abilities and occasionally supernatural abilities depending on what you are reading or who you are talking with.

I'm not saying this is why only a reason for it to be so.

SU's can't be cast though. Even when an SU has the word cast in it you are not casting the SU. There is only one SU that gives you the ability the ability to cast a spell, and it is explicitly called as as giving you the ability to cast, along with other things that are not covered by the original version of the spell. That annoyed me to no end when that first rules exception was created, which is for the ninja class because now the question is does the ability provoke attacks of opportunity. You are casting and by the rules casting provokes, but SU's dont.

Thanks for the discussion.

The Shadow Jump is still limited by the Dimension Door Spell since no exception is provided. The DD spell never says the actions are over for the round because of the amount of time DD takes. A monk as an example can do it as a move action IIRC, and he still loses the rest of his turn.
A caster can use metamatic to quicken it, and they still lose the rest of their turn.<--- That is why the amount of time it takes to use DD does not matter.

Why the feat is useful to the SD-->The feat was desired so a Shadowdancer can jump between shadows and still use any remaining actions. I will also add that while the duration of any teleportion affect is instantaneous it still takes up an action unless otherwise stated. The default action for an SU is a standard action.

The SD can no more take actions after jumping than a wizard could after using DD.

oops. Sorry about that. I did misread it. I do agree that flavor and text should always(as much as possible) match which is why I don't like the horse lord archetype's writeup.

If access to dimension door in any form is all that matters, then why not just say that, is basically what I am asking.

How is anyone seeing the class if the book is not out yet, or do the subscribers already have it?

wraithstrike wrote:

They are cast RAW. I do apologize since the proof is in another thread.

I showed RAI vs RAW with my "Dead" example. The monk ability is not in any way similar enough to the SD one to say they are equivalent for the purpose of qualifying for feats.

Nobody said the devs were infallible. I am saying that equating one ability with another is a far stretch. Saying the "shadowdancer or monk..." instead of just mentioning the monk is a far cry from "thought of everything".

1. I've read the other thread.

2. The equivalency values of the monk ability and the shadowdancer being the same, similar, or fantastically different as opposed to function or intent is a matter of opinion.

3. Stating that due to the inclusion of the monk ability they could not have left out the shadowdancer ability by accident or incidence is faulty logic. Although I will merrily agree with you that I think they left it out intentionally from the link you have shown. Although that post does not prove that they are not equivalent values for other groups of people.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time here. Rather I'm trying to show what I see as the reasoning behind the logic of the people that you are debating with and why that reasoning is valid despite some evidence to the contrary.

I understand the why people can see them as the same, but other than both working like dimension door in some sense they are different. One is shadow based. The other allows a monk to slip through spaces due to his level of self-perfection. Fluff-wise and mechanically they are very different. I think people are homing in on the "dimension door" as if that is all that matters. That is just way to see "look here(dimension door) for further details" since rewriting the ability inside of a class ability is a waste of book space.

Thanks for the explanation.

edit: That "other thread" statement was for Jodaki

I just realize I wound rather jerkish right now. I will use better wording in later post.

They are cast RAW. I do apologize since the proof is in another thread.

Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability's use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component.

A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.

If a character class grants a spell-like ability that is not based on an actual spell, the ability’s effective spell level is equal to the highest-level class spell the character can cast, and is cast at the class level the ability is gained.

With that out of the way you have nothing on your side to say this is RAI. SU's are not cast so they were obviously not saying you the Shadowdancer can cast. The shadowdancer ability is not the monk ability.

Now that we have proven the devs are flawed, and even the RAW is flawed (a Cleric 1 / Wizard 1 can convert Magic Missile to Cure Light Wounds if you take the RAW literally), we have to interrupt their meaning.

I showed RAI vs RAW with my "Dead" example. The monk ability is not in any way similar enough to the SD one to say they are equivalent for the purpose of qualifying for feats. They are no more similar than the hide in plain sight for the ranger and SD.

Nobody said the devs were infallible. I am saying that equating one ability with another is a far stretch. Saying the "shadowdancer or monk..." instead of just mentioning the monk is a far cry from "thought of everything".

I have actually discussed RAW and RAI. If you go to the "Anyone-actually-play-a-Shadowdancer" where this started you will see that.

1.No, but since the spell requires concentration they should be able to tell something is up.

2 and 3. See 1

4. They know you are casting, but unless they have ranks in spellcraft they don't know what it is. They don't know the spell is cast on them until it affects them, and in the case of spells calling for will saves they sense a hostile force. If they fail the save you have a new friend.

concerro wrote:

Magic missile works because mirror image states that it does not stop targeted effects. Examples are charm person and magic missile.

And this tells me you missed entirely what my point was. My point is not what the rules of the spell currently say, my point is what those rules say about how the world works (specifically the flavor of the spell). Sometimes a spell or ability just does not allow verisimilitude (and "a wizard did it" is only a good excuse when you're pressed for time at the table).

The effect is normally written before the flavor, but I do see your point. Why not just rewrite the flavor? Mirror image is not the only place where the flavor is hard to swallow.

Making a reflex save why paralyzed is hard to swallow since the reflex saves says it represents your ability to move out of the way. The fluff many of us use is that luck is involved also.

For my own personal satisfaction I would say that the figments are not considered to be foes for the purpose of cleave, and therefore don't count. That takes care of a lot of issues right there.

People generally take abilities for the effects so I would avoid changing the mechanics as much as I could.

I am not upset. I was just not going to debate hyperbole.
Could you explain how the above post applied to anything I said?

If the hero fights one on one and people die is he really a hero?
At the end of the day most people want results, and telling Little Timmy his parents could still be alive, but Frank the Fair refused to give the rogue a flank will not make him feel any better.

I was not trying to write my sentence as if I was writing a rule. Do you need for me to do so to stop your hyperbole or are you actually not aware of the difference between something written to provide an example, and something meant to actually dictate a rule?

Another example
If you wish to enter the building you need a gold key or a silver key.
That does not mean you can use any key.

If I say any key will allow you access to the building then we have an open case.

Now of course anyone being intentionally obtuse can make anything not clear.

PS:What is in someone's head is irrelevant. What matters is the actual definition. If I am insane I might think a bike is a truck. That does not mean my thought on the subject should be taken seriously.

PS:If that is the case then nobody is disagreeing with me since that thought may very well be in my head and all thoughts in people's head are equally valid(potentially correct) no matter how far they are from the truth.

wraithstrike wrote:

I don't see blink as all that great. Displacement and mirror image are better for most people.

Can't remember the last time I came across a 'Ring of Displacement and Mirror Image'...

Proves nothing. Maybe Blink is not worthy of being made into an item.

No, there is no bonus. I always thought there should be since in 3.5 you would only have to make the hide check and not the move silent check.

Except that in some states SUV's are considered to be trucks.

..but an SUV is not a truck. :)

My intent was clear. A and B does not equal C unless using open ended language. :)

Love the FAQ blogs! Oh so brief! You are such teasers!

Are you taking requests? For instance: an official ruling on such nonsense as rage+lance+pounce. Or more succinctly, can iterative attacks be used in conjunction with a pounce...with a charge...with a lance...with a charging lance...with a charging lance as part of a pounce?

I do not like green eggs and ham!

No, they are not. What happens is someone might ask a question in the rules forum. If the community can not resolve the issue, and the misunderstanding is deemed to be reasonable they answer the FAQ. Most rules can be explained by other members.

didn't read my posts

The logic with the HW is that it is casting dimension door. I don't see where you get that it is not. Now I don't think that is RAI, but it is RAW.

The SD is not casting anything. It is pretty clear that only SLA's and spells cast. It is also clear the one ability is not another one, and in cases where devs want open cases they this language-->"such as" or "as if".
You will see that in some of the spells in the books.
There is no opened ended language. It clearly states A or B. The shadowdancer is clearly C. The original writer wanted to leave it open, and the devs not only shut the idea down. They went out of their way to only state two possible ways to do so.

If I say you can drive my truck or my car that is what I would mean. It does not mean you can drive my SUV because they both all use have 4 tires.
If I say you can use one of my automobiles then we have an open case.

Heck the HIPS ability is useless to do the Batman disappearing act.

Say you have 4 or 5 people around you, and you somehow meet the HIPS requirements.

What are the odds one of them won't beat your opposed stealth check?

Just ruins the mystery.

"What happened? Where did he go?"

"You didn't see it? He just kinda hunched over with his hands held by his head like he was a cat, and tiptoed at half speed around the corner. Darnedest thing I ever saw."

"After him!"

You can get ridiculous stealth(or any other skill) checks if you focus on it. The GM would have to create optimized perception based characters just to be able to not lose track of you.

wraithstrike wrote:

Are people suggesting it is in any way logical to climb UP than it is to go straight ahead when any traction their limbs gives them works the same, whether you go up or ahead, with the exception being that going up forces you to fight gravity?

Yes! Look at the structure of a sloth's claws/hands. They are much more efficient when their weight is hanging from that than when their weight is pressing down on it. Their wrist bends awkwardly and they simply don't move as well. So of course they move faster climbing than they do walking. It's not about traction, here, it's about the way the body works and force vectors.

Now you have me googling sloths. :)

So for specialized animals the climb is faster, but normally it does not work. I guess the fluff can work that way, but I would not let someone climb on less than a 60 degree incline.

Are people suggesting it is in any way logical to climb UP than it is to go straight ahead when any traction their limbs gives them works the same, whether you go up or ahead, with the exception being that going up forces you to fight gravity?

You maintain the pin the same way you maintain a grapple so as long as the grappler/pinner can keep making the grapple check to hold the pin the opponent is pinned. In essence being pinned is a more severe form of being grappled.

13 rounds is more than I need. It is not like a well-made battle cleric or oracle can't already put out good numbers.
Wait, it's touch so now I get to hand it over to the fighter or barbarian who is already raging, or anyone else.

I did notice the paladin level was only for 1/2 my level, but +7 to damage even at that level is not a small thing, and it is not like I could not make scrolls of it.

You can only retrain the fighter bonus feats. The other feats are permanent when chosen.
When I GM I often give weapons the players have weapon focus in, even if the module or AP has a different weapon.

I would most likely allow it to affect all forms of movement, even if that is not the intent since it only give you 5 more feet of movement.

Most PC's can't fly naturally so I am assuming the intent is land speed.

I always play up the hobgoblins martial-like mental status in RP and combat based encounters.
You have better chance of reasoning with a hobgoblin, and it keeping its word than you would an orc. They would just rather kill you than talk, and even if they really intend to be honest about an agreement, once they feel like they don't need to they just think "oh well I tried". Then they try to kill you.

Off-topic:
I also use the kobold as comic relief instead of goblins. Goblins have nice stats IMHO, and I can't just let them go to waste. Instead of Tucker's kobolds I have Tucker's goblins.

PF is trying to stop making rules/classes/etc. Well you might see some pop up in books, but as far as a crunch related book, Ultimate Magic was supposed to be the last one that had player things in them.
The Archmage question was asked for before PF was even finalized, and afterwards. Paizo has said they will not do it.

PS:I see a lot of what I was going to say has been post by Gorbacz. I can stop typing now.

Readying an action is not on your initiative. What you are doing when readying is getting in setup.
It would be like me saying I am going to shoot the wizard with an arrow if he starts to cast a spell. That does not mean my arrow is nocked, but I am so focused on that one action that nothing else enters my mind.

I do understand why you see it like you do. I was just giving another version of possible flavor. :)

I don't see blink as all that great. Displacement and mirror image are better for most people.

RAW you still can't do it even with Multiweapon fighting. I don't know if that is RAI or not though. I don't see how having an extra arm would get around the issue so I would say no as a GM.

Stalwart defenders can get really high AC and DR. They are also good at controlling parts of a battlefield. If you want to focus more on damage then it is better to not take it.

Any magic item can be made. The specifics are up to the GM though.

Higher level custom NPC's will take longer to convert, but that is about it. I don't consider it difficult.
I convert from 3.5 to Pathfinder sometimes. Going back the other way is not any more difficult.

Nope. As an AP nears the 6th book the hype is normally down anyway. The new AP is just picking the tempo back up.

I just get a little irritated by suggestions that GMs should invent arbitrary limits on a player.

I agree with this. :)

First, thanks for helping to clear things up. Second, I'm curious to know how often "occasionally" is to you.

Maybe during boss fights of I might decide to make a non boss fight challenging if too many encounters are being steamrolled. After that I let the player go back to doing his thing. Occasionally is less than 20% for sure.

He can shapechange into a small elemental. Nothing says he has to take the 6000lb form, and unless the dungeon is built just to counter the druid those shape changes are not likely to be used up.

Even with the bridge example the elemental can go through the ground and under the bridge.

My point with the auto-win statement was that normal encounters can't really compete with RD's skill modifier. I was saying that occasionally it should be challenged since RD took the other post as saying his perception should be shutdown.

That stealth check is not trying hard for you or me, but many GM's could not have countered it.

Take your time. The game can wait.

So we go from any to specific. Thanks again. :)

Yes you can. The rules don't take exact biological attributes into affect. To bring such a level of realism to the game is up to the group or GM.

Good job on the research.

The floor is earth which earth elemental are meant to glide through.

As for tracking the druid will probably do as much scouting as it can without changing form. There is no reason to keep switching forms.

You can only bane one natural weapon, not all of them, and it can work, but it might be hard to get the CR right.

I doubt all 3 of them forgot it. I thought of the shadowdancer before I thought of the monk. Before I took the time to read the prereqs I assumed the shadowdancer could use it.

I don't think that line should be added. It sets a precedent of having to add a line for future feats in the same manner. At that point if a line is not added then people will always be able to argue that such a line is not there.

I might say that "You have to meet the exact prereqs for a feat unless otherwise stated" in order to avoid people trying to equalize. An example of this would be people asking can unarmed strikes, and natural attacks take the place of the other when qualifying for feats.

ShadowcatX wrote:

Assassins kill people for money. That's evil. Period. End of discussion. If you don't like that, then you should over haul the entire alignment system rather than just do away with alignments for classes. Or just play a ninja who kills only kills bad people for money and call yourself an assassin.

Soldiers kill people for money, but a Fighter class can be any alignment.

Rogues specialize in dishonorable combat (Sneak Attacks, Poison Use, etc.) but they can be any alignment.

The "murderers must be evil" argument really holds no weight, which is why I question the prerequisite.

Some soldiers kill for money. Most of them that are in wars are just trying to protect their friends and their nations.

Sneak attacks and poisons are not dishonorable, well poison is by D&D standards, but sneak attack is just knowing how to pick out vital body parts.

No. The leadership feat, and the mount class ability are two completely separate abilities.
You would have 1 mount and 1 monstrous buddy as two different individuals.