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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

AM BARBARIAN Build


Advice

2,051 to 2,100 of 2,212 << first < prev | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | next > last >>
Andoran

I'm not trying to mangle any language, or rules, for that matter. You've stated they go off when you throw them. Why? Is it because they hit something? Is it because they 'just know' when to explode? Because if they go off when they hit something, the container counts as a 'something.' What if he just drops them? They don't go off, because they weren't thrown, right? Or are they dangerously unstable?
Is BATTY BAT being exceptionally careful when he loads them, and while he's carrying them? Because, y'know, he doesn't have hands. Also, no matter what else BATTY BAT does, if he's attacking with them, he's got to take a standard action to throw them, and the max range on the container is 50 feet.

I've noticed you haven't addressed my statement about your changing stance on how to interpret rules. Are you now in the 'liberal interpretation' camp?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

It seems you don't know how to read a magic item.

It says they go off when you throw them, which you can do up to 70 feet. Does that need an explanation as to how or why?

No, it doesn't.

How does teleport get you right to the area you want? Is the spell intelligent? How does it keep you intact? How does it know to include others? Your gear? How does it compute a weight limit?

See how silly you're getting?

The spell does x thus and so.

Things of missiles do x thus and so.

You can throw an item as part of a charge action, but you give up the melee attack. he can also drop it from way up high, to much hilarity, and then drop down after it in a dive. Dropping something is a free action (or 'throwing it at your feet', since I know you're going to bring in 'thrown' now).

And the synthesist definitely has hands/paws/claws or something. Or you haven't seen bats.

And you again gloss over the fact he can throw AND drop it from much farther away then 50 feet net.

Comparing this to a Contingency spell, which players are trying to infer all kinds of divinatory magic into with unlimited range, interrupting actions, and predictive ability, isn't a comparison, and you know it.

Give it up, it's not working.

===Aelryinth

Andoran

Max range on the orb is 70 feet, right? How does it know when 70 feet have gone by? It's not being held by BATTY BAT any more, right? Max range on an improvised weapon is a hard cap of 50 feet. Either the 50-foot limit will hit, causing the orbs to detonate there, or the 70-foot limit will hit. In neither case does AM get to RAGELANCEPOUNCE. And you cannot drop items bombing-style as a free action. It's gotta be an attack.

You're the one assuming the orbs know not to detonate until they're thrown, and that they can somehow determine where that point is.


Trinam wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
Delenot wrote:
So, where has Trinam been?

I'm assuming he got hit with some sort of experimental ray that made AM BARBARIAN enter the real world, and now the two are in a road movie/buddy comedy on a quest to save Christmas.

"WHAT YOU MEAN, NO CAN SQUEEZE DOWN CHIMNEY RIDING BATTY BAT? NO HAVE PROOF, ONLY SAY 'BARBARIAN TOTALLY CAN'T DO THAT'. BARBARIAN USE +61 ESCAPE ARTIST AND SHOW YOU."

"Barbarian, no!"

(Chimney explodes)

"Here we go again..."

Actually, this is close. Shorter version is that I'm hiatusing until I'm done with this @#$# google doc.

My thoughts are fragmented throughout my notebook, so I'm trying to edit and pair them together. Until then, I've mostly banned myself from posting on paizo because it just gets me sucked in and then I never do anything. I'll let you know when it's done.

In the meanwhile, this should tide you over.

Explojuns is my shtick, buddy.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You know what makes this recent debate about necklace of fireball orbs funny? It is something that AM BARBARIAN would likely never do as his main tactic for everything is RAGELANCEPOUNCE. Also, it is like watching someone argue against Aelryinth only to find out that it's Aelryinth.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

DeathSpot wrote:

Max range on the orb is 70 feet, right? How does it know when 70 feet have gone by? It's not being held by BATTY BAT any more, right? Max range on an improvised weapon is a hard cap of 50 feet. Either the 50-foot limit will hit, causing the orbs to detonate there, or the 70-foot limit will hit. In neither case does AM get to RAGELANCEPOUNCE. And you cannot drop items bombing-style as a free action. It's gotta be an attack.

You're the one assuming the orbs know not to detonate until they're thrown, and that they can somehow determine where that point is.

I'm not assuming anything. You're making ridiculous inferences for a straw man argument.

They can be thrown up to 70 feet. That's a hard fact. It has nothing to do with magic. It's how far they can be thrown, a physical,not magical, fact. You could try to make the same argument with any weapon...how does it know five range increments have passed and it should fall out of the sky? GASP! All weapons are intelligent and magical! YOu cast a Fireball...how does it know to detonate at 210' and 30' left on the corner of that particular hex square! Gasp! All AoE spells are intelligent and magical!

See how pointless and inane an argument that is?

Furthermore, does it say anything about attack rolls and range increments for these things? Why, no, it doesn't. You can place them precisely and perfectly without needing to roll anything.

You can certainly drop items as a free action. It only has to be an attack if you're making an attack roll (I roll to hit...the ground! AC 0...I hit! Nat 1...I still hit!). And you could do it on a charge in place of a melee attack, with a thrown weapon.

The missiles can't be thrown more then 70 feet. But they could be dropped any amount of distance you care for, because there's no range on ANYTHING being dropped. It's not a cast spell, it's an implement. When it hits something, it's going to pop.

And incidentally, 50' forward and 50' down is about 70', and a 45 degree angle for a charge.

Give it up, man, you're REALLY grasping at straws.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

JMD031 wrote:
You know what makes this recent debate about necklace of fireball orbs funny? It is something that AM BARBARIAN would likely never do as his main tactic for everything is RAGELANCEPOUNCE. Also, it is like watching someone argue against Aelryinth only to find out that it's Aelryinth.

Yay, me!

And I never said he'd use it as his main tactic. Most likely it'd be something Batty Bat the Summoner would use. He sees a small army, dispose of the small army for his boss ("OOOO, BATTY BAT LET GO A BIG 'UN!") and complete RAGELANCEPOUNCE. BATTY BAT IS 18th level, you know!

I mean, the whole argument for taking out AB seems to be "Have a huge amount of guys with levels under me, and gang up on him."

To which the natural counter is "Have flatulence bomb that clears out huge amounts of pleebs to really mess with the casters."

==Aelryinth

Andoran

Aelryinth wrote:

I'm not assuming anything. You're making ridiculous inferences for a straw man argument.

...

See how pointless and inane an argument that is?

Try to keep the insults to a minimum, please; deliberate rudeness detracts from what makes this a neat place to visit.

Andoran

Aelryinth wrote:
They can be thrown up to 70 feet. That's a hard fact. It has nothing to do with magic. It's how far they can be thrown, a physical,not magical, fact. You could try to make the same argument with any weapon...how does it know five range increments have passed and it should fall out of the sky? GASP! All weapons are intelligent and magical! YOu cast a Fireball...how does it know to detonate at 210' and 30' left on the corner of that particular hex square! Gasp! All AoE spells are intelligent and magical!

Yes, they can be thrown up to 70 feet. Doesn't say anywhere that they can be dropped as a free action to get an attack. In fact, with a few clearly delineated exceptions, you cannot attack as a free action. So if you drop them, as opposed to throwing them, you're just handing ammo to the other side. And if you throw them, you're limited to either 50 feet (container) or 70 feet (orb). I realize you disagree with this interpretation; please show me somewhere in RAW that supports your assertion that you can attack as a free action.

Aelryinth wrote:
Furthermore, does it say anything about attack rolls and range increments for these things? Why, no, it doesn't.

Yes, it does. 70 feet for an orb, or five 10-foot range increments for the container.

Aelryinth wrote:
You can certainly drop items as a free action. It only has to be an attack if you're making an attack roll (I roll to hit...the ground! AC 0...I hit! Nat 1...I still hit!). And you could do it on a charge in place of a melee attack, with a thrown weapon.

Yes, you can attack with a thrown weapon...but you're either going to put yourself in the area of effect (if you're close enough for AM to RAGELANCEPOUNCE), as well as likely provoking an AoO, or deny AM his RAGELANCEPOUNCE.

Aelryinth wrote:
The missiles can't be thrown more then 70 feet. But they could be dropped any amount of distance you care for, because there's no range on ANYTHING being dropped. It's not a cast spell, it's an implement. When it hits something, it's going to pop.

And that something will be the container you drop them in. Either they explode on contact, or they don't. In neither case can you get more than one of them off without handing ammo to the other side.

EDIT: How far items may be thrown is a game rule, not a physical (or magical) fact.


Sorry triniam, as a lesser Devil I'm immune too fire however I did have to go and grab my spare laptop, you can expect my bill in the post of course. (Just went and read the explosive rune spell, you win this round.)

Edit:- Weighing in on the whole necklace of fireball arguement though, I must agree that improvised weapons have a maximum effective range of 50 for the crate you wish too throw and there is no rules for dropping as an attack. Since the rule book doesn't have a rule for it in any game which you would wish to do this you would have to get a ruling from your gm, which of course requires Rule 0, and since Rule 0 has absolutely no place in this thread it becomes a moot point.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

DeathSpot wrote:
stuff.

(sighs)

Kindly go re-read Necklace of Missiles. There is no mention of range increments, just a fixed range. This is also because there is no mention of ATTACK ROLLS.

Ergo, you don't need attack rolls to use these. Even if you are delivering multiple ones at a time.

You can throw something at the ground as a free action.

Even if we use a 50' range for an improvised item (who says its improvised??), the burst radius is only 20'. Batty does a toss/drop/poo-slinging, clears out the sims and RAGELANCEPOUNCE continues uninterrupted.

Trying to argue that you can't drop them from a height is like arguing that you can't hit the ground from 2000' in the air with an arrow because it's out of range, or that you can't hit someone 100' below on the ground with a dropped boulder because it's past the 50' range increment of an improvised weapon. It must magically stop at the 50' mark or something. You can throw something as far as you can throw it, but you can drop it until it hits the ground. Gravity kinda works that way, you know?

You're being willfully obtuse, making an argument up out of nothing. It's petty, and it's annoying.

I'm guessing it's probably because this is a variation of the technique you are using, i.e. quantity kills if you pay for it. The only difference is, this technique works for anyone with spare cash. 12k gp, 80d6 of fire damage, on to the next target. Heck, you could use it on AB, if you can catch him.

And it doesn't require nearly as much time and specialization as your plan to kill AB. Hmmm.

===Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

NeverNever wrote:

Sorry triniam, as a lesser Devil I'm immune too fire however I did have to go and grab my spare laptop, you can expect my bill in the post of course. (Just went and read the explosive rune spell, you win this round.)

Edit:- Weighing in on the whole necklace of fireball arguement though, I must agree that improvised weapons have a maximum effective range of 50 for the crate you wish too throw and there is no rules for dropping as an attack. Since the rule book doesn't have a rule for it in any game which you would wish to do this you would have to get a ruling from your gm, which of course requires Rule 0, and since Rule 0 has absolutely no place in this thread it becomes a moot point.

You are making an assumption that it's an improvised weapon, instead of the missiles being arranged in pottery, stone shaped clay, or something. The missiles themselves are not large, or they wouldn't be on a necklace. You could probably fit two dozen or more into an area slightly bigger then a softball. That's not improvised, that's designed. If the mage has time to whip up two dozen simulacarum, we definitely have time to commission something amenable to being thrown.

Dropping is a free action where you target a square and let go. It doesn't require an attack roll, although you can use the splash diagram if you want to for grenade-like missiles. If you want to target a person with a dropped item, it's an attack roll. If you just want to hit the ground, it is not.

So,no Rule 0 for making up stuff. For thrown weapons at the ground at range, you'd just use the grenade rules scatter diagram, which will have little to no effect on what actually happens.

===Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
DeathSpot wrote:
stuff.

(sighs)

Kindly go re-read Necklace of Missiles. There is no mention of range increments, just a fixed range. This is also because there is no mention of ATTACK ROLLS.

Ergo, you don't need attack rolls to use these. Even if you are delivering multiple ones at a time.

You can throw something at the ground as a free action.

Even if we use a 50' range for an improvised item (who says its improvised??), the burst radius is only 20'. Batty does a toss/drop/poo-slinging, clears out the sims and RAGELANCEPOUNCE continues uninterrupted.

Trying to argue that you can't drop them from a height is like arguing that you can't hit the ground from 2000' in the air with an arrow because it's out of range, or that you can't hit someone 100' below on the ground with a dropped boulder because it's past the 50' range increment of an improvised weapon. It must magically stop at the 50' mark or something. You can throw something as far as you can throw it, but you can drop it until it hits the ground. Gravity kinda works that way, you know?

You're being willfully obtuse, making an argument up out of nothing. It's petty, and it's annoying.

I'm guessing it's probably because this is a variation of the technique you are using, i.e. quantity kills if you pay for it. The only difference is, this technique works for anyone with spare cash. 12k gp, 80d6 of fire damage, on to the next target. Heck, you could use it on AB, if you can catch him.

And it doesn't require nearly as much time and specialization as your plan to kill AB. Hmmm.

===Aelryinth

I'll play devil's advocate.

An arrow from 2000 feet, you say? Does it hit "the ground"? Sure. Unless you're near a coastline. Does it hit accurately? Nosir. DM rolls to see where it lands. Even on a natural 20 it doesn't hit your target. If you're at the table and you argue the point (and I'm DM), I roll 10 percentage dice; it only hits on 1000.

A boulder dropping 50', you say? Hmm. Just one? DM rolls. This time the odds are a little better, so I force your character to make an Intelligence Check, DC 40, or a Knowledge Engineering Check, DC 50. He has to compensate for Wind and inertia and so forth. You make it, you get a +20 to another percentage dice. It only hits on a 100.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

which is GM fiat Rule 0, not the rules. Scatter rules are in there for a reason.

And yes, that arrow will still hit the ground, even near a coastline. Might take a while to get there, however!

==Aelryinth


This is exactly my point, there is no rules for making a "grenade" of this kind and then dropping it on some targets, meaning it would require gm fiat so by its very nature can't be included in a thread when we don't even HAVE a gm too make the decision.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Oh, so you're now opposed to the making of the grenade as an item, and not how its delivered, which is what DeathSpot is arguing? Because there's definitely precedent on throwing explosive things in the game...they've got a whole class built around the concept, now!

==Aelryinth


Actually you will see if you read my post that i'm against BOTH of those things. If you find rules for either though, let me know but until then I don't really consider this a arguement.


I would, however, like to direct you to the Launching Crossbow whether you could use the orbs from a Necklace of fireballs with it is something I will leave you to consider.


Alright this has hit the point of pathetic.

Here -- honestly, folks it isn't that hard. It's like you all aren't even trying to find an answer.


Abraham, that does not cover anything here. It says he can drop it sure, but does dropping it cause the Necklace too activate? Can he use it to get around the 70 feet range limit? Nothing in those rules answer that, nor do they even explain what would happen with a more conventional splash weapon.

All those rules cover is the amount of damage the container he dropped it in would deal, though it does prove that he couldn't drop attack as a free action.


If he drops it then they get a reflex save to avoid it (if he 'drops it' -- also dropping by very definition isn't throwing (which is spelled out in the combat section), and the fact he can't drop as a free action.

It's all the rules that you all were avoiding about the topic in question.

Also dropping the container would not be throwing the orbs -- the container is its own object and not the orbs (obviously).


Yes, they get a reflex to avoid the falling damage caused by the Orb hitting them. It doesn't say anything about whether it counts as a throw that will actually trigger the necklace. And further, since it says "generally the range increment is 20 feet" it still falls too a gm fiat if you can even use this too make an attack at the range required too make this even viable. Nothing has been solved, and it seems fairly obvious from the language and statements above that these rules where assumed in previous points made.

Edit:- I will note that I certainly didn't think to look at those rules, and I'm just assuming on whether the others did or did not, if anything though i'd say it further disproves using the dropping method as an attack.


Nope I'm going to stick to this line, "Dropping isn't throwing" because it specifically isn't, throwing is an attack action or part of a full attack, or a specific activation method of the item which still makes it a standard action -- and it specifically states, "Throw the orb" not "throw a container that the orb is in", by RAW you must throw the orb itself.

Even if we were to allow such nonsense it's not going to do much damage -- each of those spheres are a separate source of fire damage, with a maximum of 10d6 per sphere, so an average of 35 points of damage for the most dangerous and a maximum of 60, with a DC 14 save throw and spell resistance too (I'm assuming the enterprising mage has robes of the archmage which are infinity better than bracers of armor and a cloak of resistance in my opinion). Now granted you will probably fail some if you get hit with like... 40 of them, but even then assuming even mediocore energy resistance of 20 (or simply energy immunity of protection from energy for 120 points) you are still unlikely to actually perish from it (what with the save throws and spell resistance).


I believe I am personally in agreement with you Abraham, there are far too many fuzzy areas here, and at least one that seems to go against the RAW. I could certainly see a DM and a player working together to sort something reasonable out, but I do not believe it is poissble by the wording of the raw.

Andoran

Abraham spalding wrote:

Nope I'm going to stick to this line, "Dropping isn't throwing" because it specifically isn't, throwing is an attack action or part of a full attack, or a specific activation method of the item which still makes it a standard action -- and it specifically states, "Throw the orb" not "throw a container that the orb is in", by RAW you must throw the orb itself.

Even if we were to allow such nonsense it's not going to do much damage -- each of those spheres are a separate source of fire damage, with a maximum of 10d6 per sphere, so an average of 35 points of damage for the most dangerous and a maximum of 60, with a DC 14 save throw and spell resistance too (I'm assuming the enterprising mage has robes of the archmage which are infinity better than bracers of armor and a cloak of resistance in my opinion). Now granted you will probably fail some if you get hit with like... 40 of them, but even then assuming even mediocore energy resistance of 20 (or simply energy immunity of protection from energy for 120 points) you are still unlikely to actually perish from it (what with the save throws and spell resistance).

In fairness to Aelryinth, he's not trying to take out the main caster, he's trying to eliminate the simulacra, and that many orbs would almost certainly remove enough of them to let AM live through the first round. But that doesn't change the fact that he's trying to get around the rules by making an attack as a free action.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

And it IS in the rules that you can drop something in your hands as a free action...a cleric can drop his mace on the ground as a free action so he can cast a spell. Granted, he's probably not trying to aim the thing, but you can do so.

And Deathspot is correct, not trying at all to do anything to the mage...although if you stack enough of these things you could certainly do so. I noted 40d6 is avg 140 dmg, and should wipe out a bunch of level 10 gearless simulacra even if they make almost all their saves. It's the same overkill argument as using simulacra in the first place...spend your gold on quantity instead of quality, stack things up, and do what you need to do.

My picture on the 'range' of the device is that it can only be thrown 70' because of what it is physically...air resistance basically restricts the range. Just like you don't get extra range if you're a strong man using a javelin, without spending a feat, the missile-fireball just won't sail past 70'.

But there's also clear precedent for the things that they can be blown up by outside force and pressure, and really nothing to indicate that you can't have them blow up when they hit the ground...and then drop them.

But, as noted, throwing orbs packed together is no different then throwing orbs one by one...it isn't a weapon, it's a grenade, except individually a lot smaller. It's still being thrown at a target.

==Aelryinth


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Could you not drop the necklace of fireballs as a free action then as a standard action use a wand of fireballs to ignite them? That should be doable at a range of 600 feet. The necklace doesn't have rules for igniting it when not worn but I assume as an unattended magic item it would still make one. I am not sure what the save for the necklace would be, does it's lack of dexterity affect its save and do you include the +7 bonus? In any case you would most likely want to load up on cheap 300 gp 2d6 spheres to increase your chance of having one fail it's save since you could still ignite them on the roll of a nat 1 even if they have a +14 bonus to reflex. And each one that did fail would provoke additional saves from the remaining ones that passed I believe. Sort of reminds me of an atomic bomb.


It doesn't say you can drop them or throw them together -- it says, "You can detach and throw an orb" which isn't "you can pack all these into a jar and throw the jar."

By your own argument just putting it in the jar should set it off since you 'drop' it in the jar.

Osirion

I have a mostly casty that daily buffs, then melees, using spells for on the spot buffs or movement. I *think* he can take out RAGELANCEPOUNCE no matter who goes first. If I could get some rough numbers from Trinam, I could do the numbers post and see if my guy lives victoriously. Taking out AM BARBARIAN is easy. Having enough left in the tank to survive Batty's retribution is the questionable part. We haven't seen enough preview info on him to be sure. My guy is built from Core, APG, UM, UC and Seeker of Secrets for a couple stones and a wayfinder. One intelligent weapon and Goggles upgraded from +5 to +20 is the wildest it gets for items. No double stacked rings or anything like that.

I would need these numbers for both AM B and Batty Bat. I just need rough numbers, as most of my tricks in my bag are overkills. (Would the fourth iterative hit?)
AC, Touch AC, Perception, saves, speed, HP, CMD, SR, DR, and a totaled crit from Observed State. The crit is definitely hard to deal with.

Or, I could just post numbers and let you do the math.

And can I assume that I have been informed by the local temple that there has been a rash of casty killings in the area lately? They seem to be having a run on raise dead and resurrection spells. While good for business, they are getting annoyed that high priests are also falling to this foe. No one remembers seeing it coming, they just get hit and die.

If you are ready for the challenge, you will see a large gorillian-like synthesist flying through the air at about 2,000 ft, quite visible, carrying a pole arm. He lights up like a christmas tree to arcane sight when you get close.


So your plan to beat AM is to fight like a Martial?

Osirion

Yeah. Since his plan is to skewer anything that looks like a casty, I look like a casty and actually I am a casty, I don't see a problem with it. If I can survive his initial attack and return enough damage to drop him, I think I win. And like I said, the only real question is if I have enough left to take on Batty afterwards.

If he only wants to pick fights with castys that are going to throw spells at him, he shouldn't attack everyone on site.

I am pretty sure I can do it, by myself against him and Batty, have a 95% success rate, and have a back door escape for the 5% to try again another day. I don't need an army of clones or cannon fodder standing around me to take his hits. If my "generic" first tactic fails, I have a backup tactic for the second and third rounds. Yes, I have an intelligent weapon, but he has a full cohort. So, the balance of power on that argument is still strongly in his favor.

This is my "me too" shot at trying to go after this scourge of the air.


Which proves the AM Theory of castys acting like martials thus proving there is no CMD.

Andoran

Aelryinth wrote:

My picture on the 'range' of the device is that it can only be thrown 70' because of what it is physically...air resistance basically restricts the range. Just like you don't get extra range if you're a strong man using a javelin, without spending a feat, the missile-fireball just won't sail past 70'.

But there's also clear precedent for the things that they can be blown up by outside force and pressure, and really nothing to indicate that you can't have them blow up when they hit the ground...and then drop them.

But, as noted, throwing orbs packed together is no different then throwing orbs one by one...it isn't a weapon, it's a grenade, except individually a lot smaller. It's still being thrown at a target.

==Aelryinth

The problem with your picture on the range is that while that's more-or-less how things work in the real world, the game rules say otherwise. You simply cannot attack as a free action with the orbs or the container you're trying to put them in.

...also, a grenade is DEFINITELY a weapon.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

A grenade is a weapon, but you still don't have to roll to hit if you aren't aiming at an object or person. You aim at the junction of 4 squares and roll on the grenade scatter table.

Orbs carefully fit into a throwing device are not dropped. Something thrown inside a jar or holder is still being thrown. That's like saying alchemist fire is not being thrown because it's inside a vial. Makes no sense.

Very cool idea with the fireball and detached orbs. I can see it working even better with explosive runes as a trap...fix the orbs to a wall, with explosive runes all about. Any that fail to detonate when the runes go off will be triggered when the other orbs go off.

Am Barbarian does 3d8 + 150ish dmg on a charge, so 5d8 + 250 on a crit. Remember he also has Pounce, so he gets iteratives.

===Aelryinth


The problem with the orbs is again you can detach and throw them -- not carefully place them.

AM might have that when you know -- he actually exists.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You do not need to detach the orbs you need only purchase necklaces with one orb remaining and then ignite them at a distance after dropping them. If you wanted to have a greater chance of success you could also make a simulacrum have them wear the necklace drop them as a free action then ignite the simulacrum and it will choose to fail its saving throw and for the necklace if you instructed it to do so.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

So, Abraham, you're trying to tell me that the orbs which might blow up while you're wearing the necklace won't blow up if detach them and leave them someplace? :)

I think I disagree with you.

===Aelryinth


SOMEBODY CALL FOR AM!? AM HEARD AM NAME FROM VICINITY. HEARD AM BUSH AM BARBARIAN, AM BUSH CASTY. WANT TO SET RECORD STRAIGHT. AM BUSH AM BUSH.

Andoran

Aelryinth wrote:
A grenade is a weapon, but you still don't have to roll to hit if you aren't aiming at an object or person. You aim at the junction of 4 squares and roll on the grenade scatter table.

You still need to use a standard action to attack with it. It's not a free action.

Aelryinth wrote:
Orbs carefully fit into a throwing device are not dropped. Something thrown inside a jar or holder is still being thrown. That's like saying alchemist fire is not being thrown because it's inside a vial. Makes no sense.

There's nothing in the RAW that allows you to detach orbs and do anything except throw them, again as a standard action.

Aelryinth wrote:

Am Barbarian does 3d8 + 150ish dmg on a charge, so 5d8 + 250 on a crit. Remember he also has Pounce, so he gets iteratives.

===Aelryinth

AM isn't going to get to RAGELANCEPOUNCE, because BATTY BAT is too busy detaching and throwing one orb from his necklace.

...I'll leave the discussion of how exactly BATTY BAT does this WITHOUT HANDS as an exercise for the alert reader.


Aelryinth wrote:

So, Abraham, you're trying to tell me that the orbs which might blow up while you're wearing the necklace won't blow up if detach them and leave them someplace? :)

I think I disagree with you.

===Aelryinth

I'm saying that if you detach them they'll blow up the second they leave your hand and contact something other than air. You pull them off and then they explode.

If you manage to somehow place them in a jar without setting them off they won't explode because you didn't follow proper procedure. Magic is funny that way.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Funny, I don't see anything in the description of the fireballs that says they have to HIT anything. You throw them up to 70 feet and they explode. That could be straight up - it could be in midair at a 45 angle.

If not, then you just redefined the item's range and trigger mechanism, so we're not talking about the same item. Doesn't say anything about triggering 'once it leaves your hand'....it says its blown up when its thrown.

And Deathspot, you have no idea how many limbs Batty Bat has, he could have usable hands on his wings (which are really modified hands), and legs and tail could both be usable.

And yes, Battybat could throw it as part of a charge as a thrown weapon.

===Aelryinth


I think it bears noting that Trianam has long since abandoned his thread.


Oh I see we're playing cops and robbers now -- no need to actually bother with the rules. "Bang Bang" You're dead I shot you!

Moving on to more relevant threads.

Andoran

Aelryinth wrote:

Funny, I don't see anything in the description of the fireballs that says they have to HIT anything. You throw them up to 70 feet and they explode. That could be straight up - it could be in midair at a 45 angle.

If not, then you just redefined the item's range and trigger mechanism, so we're not talking about the same item. Doesn't say anything about triggering 'once it leaves your hand'....it says its blown up when its thrown.

And Deathspot, you have no idea how many limbs Batty Bat has, he could have usable hands on his wings (which are really modified hands), and legs and tail could both be usable.

And yes, Battybat could throw it as part of a charge as a thrown weapon.

===Aelryinth

You're still trying to make an attack as a free action. Or are you saying BATTY BAT will make a charge, then a ranged attack? That's...not possible.

Leaving that aside for the moment, what's to stop the first orb from exploding 70 feet from wherever you first let go of it? It's got a hard limit of that far; nothing in RAW allows it to travel any farther than that.

Having BATTY BAT throw orbs isn't a bad tactic, as long as AM has no desire to attack himself, but there's no way you're ever going to be able to pile a bunch of orbs in a pot, fly around for a while, then drop the pot as a free action in an attack.

...also, Abraham's right. Unless Trinam posts a build, this thread is done.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Except I've stated repeatedly that the bat can throw it as part of a charge action. Dropping it from overhead as a free action is certainly possible, too, but won't really work on a charge.

And yeah, we're all waiting on Trinam.

==Aelryinth


Triiiiiinam. Triiiiiiinam.

...

barbarian?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorry for the delay. Crap happened

Anyways, here's all I got.

Should I make a new thread for this? I've lost about 80% of my work and am playing catch-up.

Also, my wife is officially veritably fk'ing crazy.


So she is still sleeping with you? Because that's what you've just stated, and apparently you have evidence of this? Video or photographic?


1) Yes.

2) I have no evidence of this at this time. Would you like me to put up another google doc regarding it? I'm sure one could be arranged for.

3) There is much anecdotal evidence. Would this work?

Seriously though sorry for the delay. I have learned to never promise anyone anything as a result.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, f*** you, you can't see him.

I was told that I should say this. No clue why.

2,051 to 2,100 of 2,212 << first < prev | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Advice / AM BARBARIAN Build All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 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.