|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I saw that, so I am going to change my final decision also. It still irks me from a realism point of view, but stealth has enough problems with true seeing and blindsight etc etc so I guess I can be nice. :)
Witha temporary stat bonus you get the modifier BUT your actual score does not increase until 24 hours have passed. The shadow drains your actual(permanent) ability stat so bulls strength won't help. That rule is to prevent switching out stat boosting items at will.
The text does not say the creature actually has to be able to go.up to another size category. It is only providing an "if" statement so it should work by RAW and RAI.
I guess it is just a difference in play style. Most people that gi invisible when I play will not stsy in the immediate area.
I was only talking about going invis not continually attacking the same person.
Lord Twig wrote:
I agree with your first reply but for this one I think you missed what I was trying to say.
I skipped a few post so my point may have already been made.
It is not likely to have a lower level leader for reasons already mentioned especially in an evil nation.
However it is possible for an aristocrat 5/bard 2 to be in charge, but only if he is protected by someone or something higher in fantasyland. Maybe he is part of some evil organization and he lets it slip that if any harm comes to him the organization will come after whoever does it. Maybe it is rumored that some evil dragon/outsider/etc is associated with him. Beyond that, that is not much reason why someone is fantasy land is not going to gun for him.
What works logically in novels, and what works logically due to game mechanics are far apart in nature.
As for PCs' taking out leaders of nations I have had some that would have done it, if it were not so risky. Others would never do it, but depending on a real life social contract is not good evidence that the game is not better off with higher level rulers.
Darche Schneider wrote:
Yeah, I see what you mean. The rogue talents do need a boost aka they need to get better. A rogue talent allowing them to sneak attack and critical against things that normally can be critted such as elemental would be nice.
Actually the 5 foot step is not moving fast by the rules. There should not be a penalty at all, assuming you are trying to follow the rules.
If your party is level 15 to 17 then I am worried for the lich, not the players.
Heal is a standard action, and if he is healing then he is not fighting unless he quickens a spell(5th level).
I don't know how your players play, but that lich should be smart enough to have some minions.
It is better to have a CR X made of more than one creature than it is to have one creature fighting alone.
So if you have time drop the lich's CR and give him some backup.
In the real world it can be used at will most likely, but not in the game world "because balance".
Of course many people want the mechanics and flavor to mesh better and they don't like "because balance". I suspect you are in that camp, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Maybe calling upon such things is mentally strenuous. Suddenly figuring out how to become a good grappler(improved grapple, greater grapple, weapon focus(grapple), in less than 30 seconds might not be an easy thing to do. <---Why it can not be done all of the time.
A 5 foot step is "movement", but it does not take a move action. Since it is movement by the rules it is ok.
From the combat chapter:
"The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before..."
AoW is difficult. I warned my groups about it before running it for them.
The Spire of Long Shadow is really difficult. You may need to hold back when you run it.
I think you should run Champion's Belt. It is a fun adventure, and my group had an easier time with it than HoHR.
If you make it into ki, or an SLA then you are not creating flavor. You are making a rule. So like I said "flavor(which is not a rule)" does not NOT need a houserule. You are making a rule by adding a mechanic to it. It is always possible to create flavor without adding a mechanic that involves a rule.
As an example the ability to change feats could be flavored as the character being trained to adapt quickly to any situation. <----No rule change needed.
Also the abilities default to EX not SU or SLA's, so the devs have done their part. As for flavor the description says they have an ability to adapt to enemy attacks, which is close to what I just said. Now it does not call out "martial training" specifically, but it makes sense that is what is being referred to.
Maybe you want more flavor for the particular ability than "they are trained to adapt", but that is different from no flavor being provided for it, and it does not require a house rule since it is already EX.
PS: After looking again the book says "Martial Training (Ex):"
No, that is not a misprint.
That "spells per day" chart is how many spells they can cast per day.
That is different from how many spells they can learn at when you first create the class.
Also you get to cast additional spells per day depending on your intelligence. There is a chart for that in the "ability score" section in the core rulebook.
Failedlegend The Eternal Gish wrote:
I used to be that guy, but I paid enough attention to not make it obvious. I did not participate in RP, and I only wanted it to "be over with" so I could kill something.
2 or 3 sessions with no combat would not be my cup of tea even now. Trying to get in at least one combat might work. That should not be too much for them to handle, and it would make the combat player not feel like his time is being wasted.
How long are your sessions normally?
There are too many AP's most of us don't own or will never get to run. I would rather pay for a 20 for a book that iomproves upon a specific AP that I do own. The book would fix plot issues, and maybe make it a little easier to fun to 20.
But the idea of only getting 12 pages per AP would not work IMHO. An AP such as RotRL might only need 12 to 20 pages, but something like Serpent's Skull or Second Darkness would need at least 20 pages.
The brawler counts as a monk for the purpose of qualifying for feats. However, he does not gain unarmed strike damage dice that counts as monk levels because his unarmed strike damage does not call out the monk class.
However if you are not asking for PFS I see nothing wrong with allowing it to count the brawler as 3 levels higher for the purpose of unarmed strike damage dice.
He is treated as a level 1 brawler and a level 3 monk.
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
The rules are what are in the book. The rules for "a specific group" are what the GM says they are which makes them houserules.And if for no other reason than people should use the same terms, when in the forum "house rules" = changes made to the system for your enjoyment, and the "rules" = the official rules per RAI.
In addition "house rules" is not a bad term. We all have house rules, and anyone who gets upset about it is being way too sensitive.
What is flamebait/annoying is ignoring the standard definition of something, when you know what everyone else means. No I am not accusing you of this. I am just informing you so you don't become the "wrought" guy.
Short version: We had a poster using words but he used them as his group used them, instead of how most people understood them, and was surprised that nobody knew what he was talking about.
So when we say "house rules" it does NOT mean "you are doing it wrong", it just means you are not using the rules as intended in the book.
At best(not that I think this will happen) people will just say "your rules...." or some similar phrase which basically still amounts to "house rules". There is no need to come up with a new phrase that means the same thing as an old one however.
edit: In my 5+ years here I have never seen anyone get upset about the term "house rules". I have also never seen it on any other site. It is quiet common here. So even if there is some site where it is a problem, it is not the case here.
What do you mean? Give an example.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:
I am sure the those heroes wanted to rest also, and they will if given a chance. If you read a novel where someone is fighting on fumes it was because they had no choice, not because they thought "Man, if I fight with nothing left I will look really cool".
Define "handful".If you mean 7th level casters and they still have 3rd level spells then I don't know why they are resting barring very extreme cases. If they are level 15 and they only have a few 3rd level spells left then I understand, but a 15th level party can normally take on enough fights to not call it a "15 minute work day" before they are pushed to 3rd level spells.
That depends on how tough the BBEG is. Personally if they end their last fight right outside of his door/entrance before resting he would know. If they take too long to show up he should know and adjust accordingly. Resting right before a boss fight can be blind luck if the players dont know where he is. However the boss should have plans in place to deal with such things.
That is a GM problem. Unless you are in PFS you are not bound to what is in the books. Many people run home games and still fall prey to this. I have had bosses change locations, and I don't mean in the same dungeon if they had too. Give your BBEG a preferred place to fight, but he does not have to have a mandatory place to fight.
I believe you, but you have to set a tone of actions having consequences. It seem the problem here is players expecting to have their way. Even if you remove the x/day mechanic they would still arrive with full power. I never tell players they can't rest, but a lot can happen in 8 hours. Also at low levels there is a good deal of resting, but at higher levels PC's are able to take on more combats. That is just part of the game. I personally like to start PC's at 3rd to 5th level when I run homebrew games, which I have not done in a while. I have started AP's at 3rd before, and it worked out pretty well.
With regard to your resting players, there is a difference between them knowing bad guys might bother them if they sleep in enemy HQ, and the GM saying "No you can't rest because I said so". The former is something they should expect to deal with. The latter is something I would not like as a player either. Even if the bad guys don't assault them because they boarded the door they should be on alert, and be more grouped up than normal, depending on the situation.
You don't need a houserule to explain how it works. You can just find flavor that makes sense to you.
The rules don't specifically say the arrow would hit the invisible wall that is in front of the invisible person. They do.say that total cover means there is no line of affect. Therefore it is safe to assume that whatever is providing total cover is what the arrow hit. You are free to come up with your own flavor but the rules are consistent.
If it was
with the X's being the threatened areas then diagonals would be threatened.
edit:I see the ones at the bottom(below the "Natural Attacks Damage by Size" chart) now. They should be similar to how the ones for spells are. Yeah those need to be fixed.
stealth rules sans chart:
(Dex; Armor Check Penalty)
You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.
Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had concealment.
You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.
*Cover and concealment are relative, so you may be able to stealth against one creature, but not against another creature. As an example if a creature has blindsight and you are within the range of its blindsight then you can not stealth against it, even if you have concealment.
If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).
Sniping: If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.
Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.
Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving to avoid being pinpointed. Use the chart under invisibility in the glossary to determine how additional modifiers will affect your stealth bonus. The same chart also applies to your stealth check when not invisible. As an example if you are speaking in a normal voice it is a -20 to your stealth check. If you are speaking within the hearing range of another creature then it may not be possible to use stealth against them as you would be observed by their hearing. Whispering imparts a -5 modifier, to your stealth check, and your allies may need to make perception checks to hear you. The enemy may also make perception checks to hear you. If they can hear you whisper however, and you have already used stealth against them successfully it only gives them your direction but it does not pinpoint your location unless they can beat your stealth DC.
For those wondering why blindsight only cares about total cover:
Blindsight (Ex) This ability is similar to blindsense, but is far more discerning. Using nonvisual senses, such as sensitivity to vibrations, keen smell, acute hearing, or echolocation, a creature with blindsight maneuvers and fights as well as a sighted creature. Invisibility, darkness, and most kinds of concealment are irrelevant, though the creature must have line of effect to a creature or object to discern that creature or object. The ability's range is specified in the creature's descriptive text. The creature usually does not need to make Perception checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature's description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn.
Total Cover: If you don't have line of effect to your target (that is, you cannot draw any line from your square to your target's square without crossing a solid barrier), he is considered to have total cover from you.
suggested house rule:
If you feel as though requiring total cover makes it too difficult to use stealth, then having a -5 penalty apply to the stealth DC could be used to emulate the idea of hiding while someone is observing you.
PS2: If there are any other questions let me know. I want to get this part finished before adding a chart. It will be the chart in the invisibility section, and the chart in the perception area for anything that would apply to stealth. I think they match up already, but if there are any rules conflicts I will try to go with whichever one is more consistent.
PS: Transparent cover is still cover, so blindsight does not work through closed windows.
Reach weapons don't have the clause that 3.5 did however if the person is moving from 15 feet to 5 feet they still have to cross that 10 foot barrier to movement should still provoke.
This is supported by the rules because the rules reference distance not squares when determining how provoking should work for movement.
A creature with greater than normal natural reach usually gets an attack of opportunity against you if you approach it, because you must enter and move within the range of its reach before you can attack it.
Also those templates on you put a link to all account for diagonol squares so by using them a large creature with reach would not threaten a diagonol square.
Unless you are in PFS it is easier to go with the 3.5 ruling which most GM's seem to use. That allows for diagonal squares to count as threatened.
Sources are not defined so I can't give you a general rule, but I can provide an example.
Mirror image is an example. You can't keep casting mirror image spells to get more images. The images are not the source of the bonus. The spell is the source of the bonus. If you keep casting it you just get the highest number of images rolled.
Just because something(feat/class features/etc) provides an ability mod bonus to something else that does not mean feats/class features/etc stop becoming sources.
For the cape situation I would not have allowed him to break the rules. It seems like he used the cape to get extra reach. It is likely made of cloth and not substansial enough to grapple someone with as if they were using hands. If you insist on the rule of cool, then applying a -6 to -8 penalty would have been in order. You already take a -4 penalty for grappling with one hand. I am sure that one hand trumps a flimsy cape.
For the second one I would have waited for the player to come back to the table since his character may have objected to the situation. If the paladin(character) had walked off that would have been different.
The source(class features, feat, trait, magic item, etc) is what provides and dictates the bonus type. The number in and of itself is not a source. The bonus type and source and two different things.
With one being EX and other being SU they are not the exact same which makes them different, at least by RAW. However I don't expect for this to go unerrata'd. They(PDT) might say they are still the same ability, and therefore don't stack despite one being SU.