Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 513 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Charlie Bell wrote:
Drogon wrote:

Weapon cords break my verisimilitude in a big way. I'd be willing to bet anything that the last thing any real-world weapon master would want would be to have his weapon tied to his arm by a string. I'd think there are far too many in-combat drawbacks to it.

Weapon cords are for lances. You tie them to your saddle. That I'm okay with.

Sadly (for me) this is once again a permissive vs non-permissive issue...

** spoiler omitted **

I have to admit, I was referring to swords, pole-arms, and the like. I've knocked many a PC unconscious, only to watch the cleric channel, that guy to stand up, then use the weapon cord to get his weapon back and attack.

Guns, and the debates that focus on them, I avoid like the plague.

Lances were tied to saddles by many knights in history, allowing them to retrieve it when it was dropped. That I know (and have even seen in mock jousts). I'm not enough of an authority to tell you how long those cords were, or how horses avoid tripping up in them.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

I don't allow scrolls or potions to be kept in wrist sheaths. Only the items referenced in the description.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Personally, I allow scrolls, plus anything the player suggests that seems feasible. Haven't decided how I feel about potions.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

The Item Cards show all manner of scrolls, written on all sorts of materials, but the canonical scroll definition puts them on parchment or vellum, possibly with leather strips at the top and bottom. I'm fine with that being rolled up and placed in a wrist sheath. Other GMs don't allow that. (It's one of the gray areas I check when I sit at a table.)

I do enforce the "provokes an Attack of Opportuity" clause, though. Lots of people forget that.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

by definition, I don't believe that swift actions provoke though?

5/5 *

Andrew Christian wrote:
by definition, I don't believe that swift actions provoke though?

This was clarified elsewhere.

Spells that are cast as a Swift/immediate action do not provoke, but it is actually not a blanket rule at all!

I think people made it a blanket statement in their heads due to the swift spells though.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

ah, ok... that must be where I'm remembering it from then.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

CRobledo wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
by definition, I don't believe that swift actions provoke though?

This was clarified elsewhere.

Spells that are cast as a Swift/immediate action do not provoke, but it is actually not a blanket rule at all!

I think people made it a blanket statement in their heads due to the swift spells though.

See? Permissive vs non-permissive can even be selectively applied. (-;

Liberty's Edge 5/5

CRobledo wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
by definition, I don't believe that swift actions provoke though?

This was clarified elsewhere.

Spells that are cast as a Swift/immediate action do not provoke, but it is actually not a blanket rule at all!

I think people made it a blanket statement in their heads due to the swift spells though.

Yup, a good example of this is that casting a Quickened Scorching Ray does not provoke, but the ranged touch attacks of the rays of fire do.

1/5 Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A scroll isn´t typically just a slip of paper, but a wooden shaft where a paper is fixed at and rolled around, then put into some quiver. Totally legal for wrist sheaths in my eyes.

There are little mundane objects called vials. You can even acquire iron vials. Fill your potion in there and have it in the wrist sheaths. If the GM still objects you know you lost, because he wants to argue or just be a jerk and can save yourself some time and energy.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

CRobledo wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
by definition, I don't believe that swift actions provoke though?

This was clarified elsewhere.

Spells that are cast as a Swift/immediate action do not provoke, but it is actually not a blanket rule at all!

I think people made it a blanket statement in their heads due to the swift spells though.

Link? I don't see it in the CRB FAQ.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

What, the rule that swift-cast spells don't provoke? That's not in the FAQ, it's in the CRB.

5/5 *

Yep, like Jiggy said, its in the CRB (or PRD):

PRD wrote:
A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round. Casting a spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.

If you are looking for a rule that non-spell swift actions DO provoke, then I invite you to find where it says they do not. I can't give you a quote, because it's not there.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

Weapon cords as written I don't care for. Id rather see a way to holster a weapon in the same action as drawing a new one. Heck, I really just want a shoulder strap on my musket that lets it dangle when I need to switch to my blunderbuss.

for scrolls, they should definitely be used with wrist sheaths. If you think they're too fragile, I'll gladly pay for a masterwork version of the paper that can hold up better.

Scarab Sages 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CRobledo wrote:

Spells that are cast as a Swift/immediate action do not provoke, but it is actually not a blanket rule at all!

Quote:

CRB 188

You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round, and such spells don’t count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn’t incur an attack of opportunity.

There may be many swift actions that do provoke AoOs but if there are I do not know of one off the top of my head.

However, the spring loaded wrist sheath and the weapon cords are a great example of item that may since the wrist sheath specifically says it works like a normal wrist sheath and a normal wrist sheath provokes AoO as normal. The weapon cords say you can recover the weapon as a swift action but otherwise do not say that you do not provoke.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

So if a Wand is legal for a Spring-loaded Wrist Sheath because it's rigid, but a scroll isn't because it's not, can I roll my scroll around a wand and use it that way? Likewise can I use a hollowed out non-magical wand as a potion vial?

Scarab Sages 4/5

I would rule that both scrolls and potions have very specific physical descriptions. I don't see any reason why you couldn't have a scroll tube in a spring loaded sheath or a potion which is a 1x2 inch stoppered vial. You still have the action of using the item once it is retrieved. It is then a move action to retrieve the scroll from its tube and a standard action which provokes to use the potion and remember that the bad guy can choose to target the potion specifically if you provoke while drinking a potion.

SAMPLES if the rules governing.

Quote:

CRB:

Physical Description of a Scroll:
A scroll is a heavy sheet of fine vellum or high-quality paper. An area about 8-1/2 inches wide and 11 inches long is sufficient to hold one spell. The sheet is reinforced at the top and bottom with strips of leather slightly longer than the sheet is wide. A scroll holding more than one spell has the same width (about 8-1/2 inches) but is an extra foot or so long for each additional spell. Scrolls that hold three or more spells are usually fitted with reinforcing rods at each end rather than simple strips of leather. A scroll has AC 9, 1 hit point, hardness 0, and a break DC of 8.

To protect it from wrinkling or tearing, a scroll is rolled up from both ends to form a double cylinder. (This also helps the user unroll the scroll quickly.) The scroll is placed in a tube of ivory, jade, leather, metal, or wood. Most scroll cases are inscribed with magic symbols which often identify the owner or the spells stored on the scrolls inside. The symbols sometimes hide magic traps.

Quote:

APG 183

Its a move action to retrieve the scroll from the scroll tube.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

trollbill wrote:
So if a Wand is legal for a Spring-loaded Wrist Sheath because it's rigid, but a scroll isn't because it's not, can I roll my scroll around a wand and use it that way? Likewise can I use a hollowed out non-magical wand as a potion vial?

If you are asking me, I did not say I base it on whether it is rigid, but whether it is weapon-like. This is a mechanic already built into the game for retrieving items:

"Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item."

When I run, wrapping non-weapon-like items around sticks doesn't make them weapon-like. Perhaps it does at your table.

Shadow Lodge 3/5

Unlike most other items, this is one that I really wish had a hard ruling for PFS with whether things that have the most table variance - scrolls, potions, and to a lesser extent, wands and rods I suppose - had a hard ruling on.

It would be great to just make a call and stick to it and never have this come up again. There's the option of just banning the item, but just making a ruling one way or another would let us have our cake and eat it too.

Personal opinion is scrolls, potions and wands fine, rods no (that's closer to a one handed weapon than a light weapon, from my understanding).

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

I believe Mike Brock's stance in THIS THREAD means that using anything other than the items listed in the wrist sheath description is not legal for Society play. But GMs will interpret it as they may.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

You're using a statement on a particular spell to justify a blanket stance on items? No.

5/5

I'm going to put it out there that the Spring-loaded wrist sheath - even with the strictest interpretation - breaks action economy (for a price so low it doesn't even need to be on the ITS), is unrealistic, and as a result is unbalancing to the game.

Other such items have been banned in the past. This should join it.

If you want a free-action retrieval of an item, there is the Glove of Storing available, at a more reasonable and balanced price.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

CRobledo wrote:

Yep, like Jiggy said, its in the CRB (or PRD):

PRD wrote:
A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round. Casting a spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.
If you are looking for a rule that non-spell swift actions DO provoke, then I invite you to find where it says they do not. I can't give you a quote, because it's not there.

Yes, in fact it was the latter for which I was looking.


Mekkis wrote:
I'm going to put it out there that the Spring-loaded wrist sheath - even with the strictest interpretation - breaks action economy (for a price so low it doesn't even need to be on the ITS), is unrealistic, and as a result is unbalancing to the game.

You think a swift action draw of an item that can't be larger than your forearm breaks the game? Dude, there is a class that can create a demiplane, alter reality, and summon in angels. Is it really worse that you can draw a dagger as a swift action and still provoke?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Will Johnson wrote:
trollbill wrote:
So if a Wand is legal for a Spring-loaded Wrist Sheath because it's rigid, but a scroll isn't because it's not, can I roll my scroll around a wand and use it that way? Likewise can I use a hollowed out non-magical wand as a potion vial?

If you are asking me, I did not say I base it on whether it is rigid, but whether it is weapon-like. This is a mechanic already built into the game for retrieving items:

"Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item."

When I run, wrapping non-weapon-like items around sticks doesn't make them weapon-like. Perhaps it does at your table.

I wasn't specifically addressing that to you, but your statement does beg the question that if a foot-long stick is a weapon-like object, why is a foot-long stick with a piece of paper wrapped around it not?

Liberty's Edge 5/5

I think the main issue here trollbill, is that many guys who mostly GM, feel the pain of action economy every time they run a scenario. This is the nature of the game. PCs often have more actions per round than the NPCs. It can become a fairly helpless feeling sometimes, which is not fun.

This gets exacerbated when the PCs keep finding ways of improving their action economy, but the NPCs still have their set number of actions they can take.

So this is what raises the hackles when someone tries to “push” the rules to achieve better action economy with something that borderline should work the way the player is trying to make it work (i.e. scrolls or potions in wrist sheaths.)

I’m not saying either side is wrong. Just giving a potential reasoning behind why there is so much resistance to scrolls and potions in wrist sheaths.

Mundane items that seriously effect action economy (spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon cords) should never have been created for the game, or allowed in PFS. But the cat’s outta the bag, and now we have to figure out how to work with them.


Andrew Christian wrote:
Mundane items that seriously effect action economy (spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon cords) should never have been created for the game, or allowed in PFS. But the cat’s outta the bag, and now we have to figure out how to work with them.

Well that's an opinion. I'm actually just fine with both of those items, and I don't think there's any 'figure out how to work with them' involved. The alternative of never having mundane items that do anything is a little bit lame imo. Though I'll agree weapon cords can get ridiculously silly.

Can I ask what broken things happen with wrist sheaths that I'm not seeing?

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

MrSin wrote:
You think a swift action draw of an item that can't be larger than your forearm breaks the game? Dude, there is a class that can create a demiplane, alter reality, and summon in angels. Is it really worse that you can draw a dagger as a swift action and still provoke?

1) Apples and oranges.

1a) Nobody's creating demiplanes at Level 3.

1b) 5th-level characters might be summoning in CR 2 archons, but those take a full round to join the fight, and they only stick around for 5 rounds.

At the character levels that PFS develops almost every table has at least one person with a SLWS. Usually, most everyone does. The ubiquity of the item suggests that, yes, it alters the way the game is played. It's a winning move for every PC. Summon Monster III isn't even close to being in the same league.

2) Daggers aren't really the issue, since weapons can already be drawn as part of movement. Please re-read the thread.

3) Almost no GMs enforce the "provoke an AoO" clause, if my players' shocked objections are to be believed.

3a) Most of those players then realize that they don't have the rules for the SLWS handy, and their toy suddenly stops working at all.

Silver Crusade 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
trollbill wrote:


I wasn't specifically addressing that to you, but your statement does beg the question that if a foot-long stick is a weapon-like object, why is a foot-long stick with a piece of paper wrapped around it not?

I have no problem with someone getting the foot long stick with paper wrapped around it into their hand just as quickly as getting the foot long stick into their hand. It's the unrolling of that paper into a readable position, possibly hampered by whatever was attaching it to the stick, that could logically slow things down.

And that's assuming that we're talking about paper thick enough not to be torn or bent completely out of shape by the spring mechanism, which could make for a thick enough package when wrapped around the stick to bring into question if it should still fit. But I'm definitely willing to let that part slide.

And I disagree with Andrew's assertion that this is a player vs GM argument. I GM, but almost never high enough level games to worry about someone bringing a Breath of Life in a spring loaded sheath. On the other hand, I do have a level 8 cleric with a scroll of BoL, who might want to do this. But I just can't bring myself to accept that it should logically work.

On the other hand, I'd be fine with some sort of bandolier item that allows drawing of small objects as a swift action. Not because I think action economy needs it, but because it actually makes physical sense.

Edit to add: But here's a completely different idea I had. Could a cleric just attach a scroll to the inside of their shield, so they just have to hold the shield up in front of their face to read it? Now THAT would break action economy, but logically, it should work. In a home game, I'd let a cleric do this, but say that they can't use the shield for defense that round, because it was otherwise occupied.


Chris Mortika wrote:
Please re-read the thread.

I've been reading it and I'd appreciate if you didn't try to tell me I haven't.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Andrew Christian wrote:

I think the main issue here trollbill, is that many guys who mostly GM, feel the pain of action economy every time they run a scenario. This is the nature of the game. PCs often have more actions per round than the NPCs. It can become a fairly helpless feeling sometimes, which is not fun.

This gets exacerbated when the PCs keep finding ways of improving their action economy, but the NPCs still have their set number of actions they can take.

So this is what raises the hackles when someone tries to “push” the rules to achieve better action economy with something that borderline should work the way the player is trying to make it work (i.e. scrolls or potions in wrist sheaths.)

I’m not saying either side is wrong. Just giving a potential reasoning behind why there is so much resistance to scrolls and potions in wrist sheaths.

Mundane items that seriously effect action economy (spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon cords) should never have been created for the game, or allowed in PFS. But the cat’s outta the bag, and now we have to figure out how to work with them.

I understand the balance issue, but that is a separate argument. If the reason someone doesn't want to allow something is for reasons of game balance it is disingenuous to claim he/she isn't allowing it for reasons of real world logic.

4/5 ****

MrSin wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Please re-read the thread.
I've been reading it and I'd appreciate if you didn't try to tell me I haven't.

I'm pretty sure that re-read implies that you have already read it at least once.


Pirate Rob wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Please re-read the thread.
I've been reading it and I'd appreciate if you didn't try to tell me I haven't.
I'm pretty sure that re-read implies that you have already read it at least once.

You know what I meant though right? You wouldn't want me to tell you to reread the thread because you just didn't get it or something would you?

The Exchange 4/5

MrSin wrote:
Pirate Rob wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Please re-read the thread.
I've been reading it and I'd appreciate if you didn't try to tell me I haven't.
I'm pretty sure that re-read implies that you have already read it at least once.
You know what I meant though right? You wouldn't want me to tell you to reread the thread because you just didn't get it or something would you?

in fairness, this thread has nothing to do with getting daggers, it's about potions. Daggers are listed, wrist sheath lists them, they aren't part of the discussion (has been said, is true).

Chris's point is that the wrist sheath is ALREADY a problem, making it more versatile doesn't seem needed.

5/5

Fromper wrote:


Edit to add: But here's a completely different idea I had. Could a cleric just attach a scroll to the inside of their shield, so they just have to hold the shield up in front of their face to read it? Now THAT would break action economy, but logically, it should work. In a home game, I'd let a cleric do this, but say that they can't use the shield for defense that round, because it was otherwise occupied.

There's actually a named shield that does that...Caster's Shield.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Mr Sin, you were under the impression that people were worried about players drawing daggers as a swift action. I directed you to the more legitimate concerns that posters have raised. If you had already read and appreciated those concerns, I apologize for misunderstanding you, and I invite you to address those legitimate concerns.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Sniggevert wrote:
Fromper wrote:


Edit to add: But here's a completely different idea I had. Could a cleric just attach a scroll to the inside of their shield, so they just have to hold the shield up in front of their face to read it? Now THAT would break action economy, but logically, it should work. In a home game, I'd let a cleric do this, but say that they can't use the shield for defense that round, because it was otherwise occupied.
There's actually a named shield that does that...Caster's Shield.

Why does it have to be a specific magic item? Why can't a normal, everyday scroll be attached to a normal, everyday shield? There's no scotch tape in Golarion, but I'm sure they seal things with wax all the time, which could be used to do this.

Besides, even that magic shield has the limitation of only allowing up to level 3 spells, so it doesn't work with Breath of Life. And it's a light shield - I usually use bucklers with my casting clerics, so they can have a weapon in one hand, and still cast and/or present a holy symbol with the other.

5/5

Chris Mortika wrote:

3) Almost no GMs enforce the "provoke an AoO" clause, if my players' shocked objections are to be believed.

3a) Most of those players then realize that they don't have the rules for the SLWS handy, and their toy suddenly stops working at all.

I love 3a.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Chris Mortika wrote:

3) Almost no GMs enforce the "provoke an AoO" clause, if my players' shocked objections are to be believed.

3a) Most of those players then realize that they don't have the rules for the SLWS handy, and their toy suddenly stops working at all.

By far, this is the best take-away in this thread.

Mr. Sin wrote:
Can I ask what broken things happen with wrist sheaths that I'm not seeing?

I'm going to point at something else that Chris said:

Chris Mortika wrote:
At the character levels that PFS develops almost every table has at least one person with a SLWS. Usually, most everyone does. The ubiquity of the item suggests that, yes, it alters the way the game is played.

It is not that the item is broken. It is that it is an "automatic" to include in your inventory. If you don't have one, someone will eventually clue you in to the item, and you WILL have one. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's broken. It DOES mean that it's too good at its price/level/position/job/whatever.

If every single player in the game should have one of these, or otherwise they are "nerfed" in the eyes of their peers, then something has gone wrong with its design. I.E., as-is, it shouldn't be in the game.

Edit: Damn you, ninja-Kyle!

Lantern Lodge 5/5

Drogon wrote:
Edit: Damn you, ninja-Kyle!

I am very sneaky.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Fromper wrote:
Sniggevert wrote:
Fromper wrote:


Edit to add: But here's a completely different idea I had. Could a cleric just attach a scroll to the inside of their shield, so they just have to hold the shield up in front of their face to read it? Now THAT would break action economy, but logically, it should work. In a home game, I'd let a cleric do this, but say that they can't use the shield for defense that round, because it was otherwise occupied.
There's actually a named shield that does that...Caster's Shield.

Why does it have to be a specific magic item? Why can't a normal, everyday scroll be attached to a normal, everyday shield? There's no scotch tape in Golarion, but I'm sure they seal things with wax all the time, which could be used to do this.

Besides, even that magic shield has the limitation of only allowing up to level 3 spells, so it doesn't work with Breath of Life. And it's a light shield - I usually use bucklers with my casting clerics, so they can have a weapon in one hand, and still cast and/or present a holy symbol with the other.

And herein lies the crux of the argument.

"Why should I spend thousands of gold on something when I can spend 5 gp on something else that actually does a better job of what I want done?"

If this is how much of a disparity exists in the SLWS, something is definitely wrong.

The same thing, by the way, can be said of Gloves of Storing.

5/5

Fromper wrote:
Sniggevert wrote:
Fromper wrote:


Edit to add: But here's a completely different idea I had. Could a cleric just attach a scroll to the inside of their shield, so they just have to hold the shield up in front of their face to read it? Now THAT would break action economy, but logically, it should work. In a home game, I'd let a cleric do this, but say that they can't use the shield for defense that round, because it was otherwise occupied.
There's actually a named shield that does that...Caster's Shield.

Why does it have to be a specific magic item? Why can't a normal, everyday scroll be attached to a normal, everyday shield? There's no scotch tape in Golarion, but I'm sure they seal things with wax all the time, which could be used to do this.

Besides, even that magic shield has the limitation of only allowing up to level 3 spells, so it doesn't work with Breath of Life. And it's a light shield - I usually use bucklers with my casting clerics, so they can have a weapon in one hand, and still cast and/or present a holy symbol with the other.

I don't know why they did it, truly, but I think you probably hit fairly close to the mark in your first EDIT. Sometimes logical things don't work quite right as part of the game balance rules, even though it feels like they should =/

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Daisuke Intonjutsu wrote:
Drogon wrote:
Edit: Damn you, ninja-Kyle!
I am very sneaky.

Not as sneaky as me. Looked around your mountain top, the last week? d-:

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:

It is not that the item is broken. It is that it is an "automatic" to include in your inventory. If you don't have one, someone will eventually clue you in to the item, and you WILL have one. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's broken. It DOES mean that it's too good at its price/level/position/job/whatever.

If every single player in the game should have one of these, or otherwise they are "nerfed" in the eyes of their peers, then something has gone wrong with its design. I.E., as-is, it shouldn't be in the game.

Let's talk about alchemist's fire and spiked gauntlets...

Scarab Sages 5/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:


Then again, adventurers seem to pull things out of hammerspace even before they get haversacks. How many characters have you seen with stowed polearms?

As a person who has done a lot of boffer-LARP in my mispent youth, stowing a polearm is quite doable - the taller the stowing, the easier. Reach weapons are not 10 feet long - they are longer then normal weapons so they 'reach' into the next square.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Kyle Baird wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
3) 3a) Most of those players then realize that they don't have the rules for the SLWS handy, and their toy suddenly stops working at all.
I love 3a.

Hard and fast rule for wrist sheaths? Nah.

This looks like a hard but fair one, though.

5/5

Fast Fingers Freddy wrote:
Daisuke Intonjutsu wrote:
Drogon wrote:
Edit: Damn you, ninja-Kyle!
I am very sneaky.
Not as sneaky as me. Looked around your mountain top, the last week? d-:

To be fair, it's Doug's mountain. My ego just floats around it. Things are getting cramped up here, you may have to room with the girls. ;-)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drogon wrote:

I'm going to point at something else that Chris said:

Chris Mortika wrote:
At the character levels that PFS develops almost every table has at least one person with a SLWS. Usually, most everyone does. The ubiquity of the item suggests that, yes, it alters the way the game is played.

It is not that the item is broken. It is that it is an "automatic" to include in your inventory. If you don't have one, someone will eventually clue you in to the item, and you WILL have one. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's broken. It DOES mean that it's too good at its price/level/position/job/whatever.

If every single player in the game should have one of these, or otherwise they are "nerfed" in the eyes of their peers, then something has gone wrong with its design. I.E., as-is, it shouldn't be in the game.

So does that mean there is a problem with Wands of Cure Light Wounds, Handy Haversacks and 50-foot rope?

Ninja'd by Jiggy.

5/5

trollbill wrote:
So does that mean there is a problem with Wands of Cure Light Wounds, Handy Haversacks and 50-foot rope?

Those the three you want to pick?

1) Wands of CLW are rarely useful in combat past the first few levels except to stabilize someone. As characters progress in levels, wands of CLW become less valuable. SLWS never lose their value and could be argued to gain value as PCs can afford higher level wands.

2) IME, Haversacks aren't as ubiquitous as wands of CLW or even SLWS. They're certainly nice to have to reduce encumbrance, however their effectiveness in combat is marginal (essentially just eliminates the AoO if you're next to someone). Additionally, they cost 2,000 gp and don't improve your action economy.

3) How often is 50-ft of rope used in combat? You also might be surprised at the number of table's I've run where none of the players (at various levels) have any rope. Additionally, some traps/obstacles are specifically designed using the assumption that PCs have rope. Much like it's assumed that PCs have rations, a light source, waterskins and other standard adventuring gear.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

trollbill wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

I think the main issue here trollbill, is that many guys who mostly GM, feel the pain of action economy every time they run a scenario. This is the nature of the game. PCs often have more actions per round than the NPCs. It can become a fairly helpless feeling sometimes, which is not fun.

This gets exacerbated when the PCs keep finding ways of improving their action economy, but the NPCs still have their set number of actions they can take.

So this is what raises the hackles when someone tries to “push” the rules to achieve better action economy with something that borderline should work the way the player is trying to make it work (i.e. scrolls or potions in wrist sheaths.)

I’m not saying either side is wrong. Just giving a potential reasoning behind why there is so much resistance to scrolls and potions in wrist sheaths.

Mundane items that seriously effect action economy (spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon cords) should never have been created for the game, or allowed in PFS. But the cat’s outta the bag, and now we have to figure out how to work with them.

I understand the balance issue, but that is a separate argument. If the reason someone doesn't want to allow something is for reasons of game balance it is disingenuous to claim he/she isn't allowing it for reasons of real world logic.

Unless the real world logic, rules of the game, and game balance all coincide with one another.

51 to 100 of 513 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.