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

Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion

201 to 250 of 513 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Drogon wrote:
And I can't show them the rule where it says it DOESN'T.

You can now! :D

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

Drogon wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Drogon wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
If the GMing community really doesn't like these things that much, please cut down the table variation and get them banned. That's actually preferable in many ways to having on the list of things to ask every GM I sit down with.

I am actually of the opinion that they should be, as well. I think that's where this thread began to derail, so thank you for pointing it out.

Mike: ban 'em, would you?

And while you're at it would you take a long, hard look at ioun torches and weapon cords? (-;

I'm with you on the weapon cords... but the ioun torch? Really? Every caster (okay, except rangers and paladins) can get a hands-free light source with a light cantrip. What's wrong with letting non-casters have it too?

The simple fact that casters no longer HAVE to memorize light. I can't even remember the last time one did, seeing as everyone around the table now has a slotless, permanent light source at the LOW LOW PRICE! of 75 gp. One that, by the way, has a caster level of 12 for creation requirement, prompting many an argument about the fact that they DO, in fact, trump deeper darkness.

Because, you know, show me where it says they DON'T...

For 50gp anyone can get their friendly party cleric to cast continual flame on one of their items, and have it last between sessions.*

I don't see how spending an extra 25gp is really breaking anything. It's just forcing you to put it on a dull grey ioun stone. Is it really that big of a deal?

*only one such casting at a time, of course.

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Jiggy wrote:
Drogon wrote:
The simple fact that casters no longer HAVE to memorize light. I can't even remember the last time one did, seeing as everyone around the table now has a slotless, permanent light source at the LOW LOW PRICE! of 75 gp.

Guess I just disagree that replacing a cantrip with a magic item is a bad thing.

Quote:

One that, by the way, has a caster level of 12 for creation requirement, prompting many an argument about the fact that they DO, in fact, trump deeper darkness.

Because, you know, show me where it says they DON'T...

Okay:

Darkness wrote:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
Ioun torches entirely fail to increase the light level in an area of darkness, because they are not of a higher spell level. (As an aside, it's remarkable how often people think it's CL instead of SL; was it different in a previous edition or something?)

Fair. I shot that from the hip, and shouldn't have. I'm busy with too many things at this point to try to keep the correct rules in my mind long enough to apply them properly in a serious debate.

For the record: I still think ioun torches are silly at their price...

PS - I am also still of the opinion that the old rule of "Duration of 'Permanent' is not available to PCs" was a good rule.

Silver Crusade *

Jiggy wrote:
Drogon wrote:
The simple fact that casters no longer HAVE to memorize light. I can't even remember the last time one did, seeing as everyone around the table now has a slotless, permanent light source at the LOW LOW PRICE! of 75 gp.

Guess I just disagree that replacing a cantrip with a magic item is a bad thing.

Quote:

One that, by the way, has a caster level of 12 for creation requirement, prompting many an argument about the fact that they DO, in fact, trump deeper darkness.

Because, you know, show me where it says they DON'T...

Okay:

Darkness wrote:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
Ioun torches entirely fail to increase the light level in an area of darkness, because they are not of a higher spell level. (As an aside, it's remarkable how often people think it's CL instead of SL; was it different in a previous edition or something?)

I thought that ioun torch was effectively continual flame. Never mind, I see it's level 2 on the wizard chart. Darkness, how I hate thee.

So when my cleric casts it, it works, but the item gets boned. Just great. There is no logic in this place sometimes.

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

David Bowles wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Drogon wrote:
The simple fact that casters no longer HAVE to memorize light. I can't even remember the last time one did, seeing as everyone around the table now has a slotless, permanent light source at the LOW LOW PRICE! of 75 gp.

Guess I just disagree that replacing a cantrip with a magic item is a bad thing.

Quote:

One that, by the way, has a caster level of 12 for creation requirement, prompting many an argument about the fact that they DO, in fact, trump deeper darkness.

Because, you know, show me where it says they DON'T...

Okay:

Darkness wrote:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
Ioun torches entirely fail to increase the light level in an area of darkness, because they are not of a higher spell level. (As an aside, it's remarkable how often people think it's CL instead of SL; was it different in a previous edition or something?)

I thought that ioun torch was effectively continual flame. Never mind, I see it's level 2 on the wizard chart. Darkness, how I hate thee.

So when my cleric casts it, it works, but the item gets boned. Just great. There is no logic in this place sometimes.

Could just ban 'em and make life easy. d-;

Shadow Lodge *** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Silicon Valley aka JohnF

Chris Mortika wrote:
We've already dialed back on Heirloom Weapons. If we ban spring-loaded wrist sheaths, who will buy copies of Adventurers Armory?

Druids who want to wear Leaf Armo(u)r, but who don't have a copy of the Inner Sea World Guide?

Most of the other good stuff (M/W backpack, Bladeguard, ...) also shows up in the APG and/or UE

Andoran ** RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Please let's not ban common gear like SLWS and ioun torches. These ban discussions are the reason we can't have nice things like QRS and bracers of falcon's aim.

I realize that the squeaky wheels who post here complaining about these things are the ones who inevitably get the grease in the form of bans. Please realize that there are a ton of players who are justifiably disappointed when they pick up a book like UE, find this cool item, and then learn it's on a ban list because some guys got up in arms about it back in 2011.

Nobody ever stopped playing PFS because of a SLWS.

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

John Francis wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
We've already dialed back on Heirloom Weapons. If we ban spring-loaded wrist sheaths, who will buy copies of Adventurers Armory?

Druids who want to wear Leaf Armo(u)r, but who don't have a copy of the Inner Sea World Guide?

Most of the other good stuff (M/W backpack, Bladeguard, ...) also shows up in the APG and/or UE

Due to the ridiculous amount of errata, and the 'porting of anything good over to other books, no one buys them, anyway. I've had two sitting on my shelf forever. Even 50% off sales couldn't get rid of them.

May as well just remove the book from the list of available resources. Happily, that would solve all kinds of problem. :-D

Qadira ***

John Francis wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
We've already dialed back on Heirloom Weapons. If we ban spring-loaded wrist sheaths, who will buy copies of Adventurers Armory?

Druids who want to wear Leaf Armo(u)r, but who don't have a copy of the Inner Sea World Guide?

Most of the other good stuff (M/W backpack, Bladeguard, ...) also shows up in the APG and/or UE

Clearear in the Black Market items....

+2 on Perception and Knowledge skill checks, for a -2 on CHA skills? and the cost is 15gp for 6 hours use....

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Charlie Bell wrote:

Please let's not ban common gear like SLWS and ioun torches. These ban discussions are the reason we can't have nice things like QRS and bracers of falcon's aim.

I realize that the squeaky wheels who post here complaining about these things are the ones who inevitably get the grease in the form of bans. Please realize that there are a ton of players who are justifiably disappointed when they pick up a book like UE, find this cool item, and then learn it's on a ban list because some guys got up in arms about it back in 2011.

Nobody ever stopped playing PFS because of a SLWS.

Man, I'm a "squeaky wheel" now? When did that I happen? I thought I was one of the reasonable ones...

Ooo! Wait! You left weapon cords out. Does that mean you're okay banning that one? I'll take one out of three.

*

Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber
Drogon wrote:

...

But point #1 is making you reevaluate your reasonableness, isn't it? And, even if it does take the bracer slot, you're thinking to yourself, "Hm. How many times has my ranger wanted that gravity bow wand as a swift? How much would it mean to be able to buff, move, then full attack the following round for my fighter? How much does it mean for me to be able to not have to MEMORIZE breath of life, actually?" Those are all pretty good deals. Especially at 5gp...

Not particularly no. The 5 gold item is not magical, so having it cost more than 1 or 2 hundred gold would feel awkward in a world where (it seems to me) only magical items cost tons of gold. I don't see the need to make it prohibitively expensive, given how scrolls and wands work (CL checks or fail for spells you can't cast).

I don't see the need to make memorizing BoL a torturous decision. One of the MAJOR POINTS Of scrolls is to have consumables for the spells that are situationally useful, not generally so. BoL fits that situational tag brilliantly. I'm a melee Cleric. Having to choose between Righteous Might and Breath of Life is not a decision I feel that I should have to deal with if I pay the money to have the scroll.

But also, it's an item that is simply a vehicle for an 1100g consumable. It gives me no personal benefit. Given my interpretation of the slot rules (incorrect up to this point or not), the SLWS hinders me or has hindered me from giving myself a benefit in the bracer slot, simply to be able to be helpful to the party when things go bad.

People that use the sheath as a way to quickly buff with wands, scrolls or potions in combat, they still have to use a standard to cast from wands or scrolls and therefore, need to spend a whole round to buff. As for potions, I didn't realize they could be long and thin like that. I feel like GMs could do interesting things with a potion on a wrist sheath. Sunder potion, anyone? ;)

Andoran ** RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

TBH I'd be irritated if SLWS was banned, but I'd really be OK with weapon cords.

I'm not going to start a messageboard crusade to get them banned, though--there are a lot of players who really like them, even if I think they are, as the French say, le fromage.

Spoiler:
You shouldn't take "squeaky wheel" as a pejorative. The fact is, only a small percentage of GMs care enough to post here about anything, let alone items to ban. Compare that #, in the tens, perhaps, to the how many tens of thousands of PFS players to whom the SLWS is either a) a useful aid, or b) not on their radar at all.

Qadira ***

Kyle Baird wrote:
trollbill wrote:
I could argue using a scroll of BoL with a SLWS would be one of those cases of broken for the right reasons.
And there are many people who I know and respect that share the same opinion. I do not. I think it trivializes the need to learn and understand good tactics. It's my opinion that too many of these "easy" solutions to serious consequences leads to ill-prepared adventurers.

Then your problem isn't with a SLWS, its with BoL because nothing is stopping that same Cleric from preparing that spell and using it to do what you were just complaining about. All the BoL+SLWS does is, for 1,230 GP, to allow him to not waist a prepared slot on one of those 'emergency' spells that people commonly keep on scrolls because they only get used less than 10% of the time, but when you need them you need them. Thus, taking BoL+SLWS instead of putting it in a prepared slot IS good tactics.

*****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
Then your problem isn't with a SLWS, its with BoL because nothing is stopping that same Cleric from preparing that spell and using it to do what you were just complaining about. All the BoL+SLWS does is, for 1,230 GP, to allow him to not waist a prepared slot on one of those 'emergency' spells that people commonly keep on scrolls because they only get used less than 10% of the time, but when you need them you need them. Thus, taking BoL+SLWS instead of putting it in a prepared slot IS good tactics.

I have no problems with breath of life, but thanks for telling me that I do.

Qadira ***

trollbill wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
trollbill wrote:
I could argue using a scroll of BoL with a SLWS would be one of those cases of broken for the right reasons.
And there are many people who I know and respect that share the same opinion. I do not. I think it trivializes the need to learn and understand good tactics. It's my opinion that too many of these "easy" solutions to serious consequences leads to ill-prepared adventurers.
Then your problem isn't with a SLWS, its with BoL because nothing is stopping that same Cleric from preparing that spell and using it to do what you were just complaining about. All the BoL+SLWS does is, for 1,230 GP, to allow him to not waist a prepared slot on one of those 'emergency' spells that people commonly keep on scrolls because they only get used less than 10% of the time, but when you need them you need them. Thus, taking BoL+SLWS instead of putting it in a prepared slot IS good tactics.

nah, just hit him 3 or 4 more times when he's down. If you can dump enough damage into the body before the cleric gets there with the BoL, it stays dead (BoL does 5d8+level right? so just have the other Mooks swing at the downed guy - he's easier to hit now!).

;)

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka CRobledo

To be fair with Kyle, A cleric using BOL at 9th level is probably what is intended. The difference is I have seen SLWS used so that non-clerics/oracles, or <9th level characters getting to use the spell (with appropriate CL or UMD checks). I myself have a scroll of BOL carried by my Lyrakien Azata with a SLWS for when a GM allows it, and I myself can't do anything but agree that it's cheese of the stinkiest kind. But I will just have her carry it on her hand if the GM has a problem with it.

If you think a cleric preparing BoL is a wasted slot, then I don't know what to tell you. There will be situations where you just can't read a scroll in.

Said cleric has other options if he REALLY wants that scroll:
1. gloves of storing
2. carry it around in his hand the whole time
3. put it in a haversack and go hug the barbarian the whole time.

Qadira ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Breath of Life scrolls in deeper darkness fields make players sad.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

CRobledo wrote:
To be fair with Kyle, A cleric using BOL at 9th level is probably what is intended. The difference is I have seen SLWS used so that non-clerics/oracles, or <9th level characters getting to use the spell (with appropriate CL or UMD checks). I myself have a scroll of BOL carried by my Lyrakien Azata with a SLWS for when a GM allows it, and I myself can't do anything but agree that it's cheese of the stinkiest kind.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying that using scrolls and the UMD skill in exactly the manner put forth in the CRB is different than "what is intended" and is "cheese of the stinkiest kind".

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka CRobledo

Jiggy wrote:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you're saying that using scrolls and the UMD skill in exactly the manner put forth in the CRB is different than "what is intended" and is "cheese of the stinkiest kind".

Naw, the cheese was about having my azata with UMD and SLWS carrying around multiple BOL scrolls.

Silver Crusade *

Chris Mortika wrote:

deeper darkness fields make players sad.

There, fixed that for you.

Qadira ***

Kyle Baird wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Then your problem isn't with a SLWS, its with BoL because nothing is stopping that same Cleric from preparing that spell and using it to do what you were just complaining about. All the BoL+SLWS does is, for 1,230 GP, to allow him to not waist a prepared slot on one of those 'emergency' spells that people commonly keep on scrolls because they only get used less than 10% of the time, but when you need them you need them. Thus, taking BoL+SLWS instead of putting it in a prepared slot IS good tactics.
I have no problems with breath of life, but thanks for telling me that I do.

Then why don't you explain what you said then because I see no way how a SLWS by itself can do anything to prevent the results of poor tactics, but I definitely see how BoL can.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Fresno aka Sarta

Dhjika wrote:
So if Free actions can provoke, rarely, then certainly swift actions could. And Table 8-2 never shows a free action that provokes, so perhaps.......

Off the top of my head, the Rogue Talent: Stand Up is a free action which provokes attacks of opportunity.

Osirion ****

Paizo Superscriber
Will Johnson wrote:
Dhjika wrote:
So if Free actions can provoke, rarely, then certainly swift actions could. And Table 8-2 never shows a free action that provokes, so perhaps.......
Off the top of my head, the Rogue Talent: Stand Up is a free action which provokes attacks of opportunity.

Most free actions and swift actions are either Ex, Su, or specify whether or not they provoke. Not all do, I believe there are some items in UE that do not indicate whether or not they provoke. But using a magic item doesn't provoke by default.

I could say they always tell you when it deviates, but they don't. There are magic items in UE that say they do not provoke.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Fresno aka Sarta

Any Quickened spell with a Ranged Touch attack will also provoke when the caster makes the ranged attack. Casting the spell is fine, but the ranged attack provokes like normal.

Osirion *** Venture-Lieutenant, Colorado—Denver aka Rusty Ironpants

David Bowles wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
The whole point is for a divine caster to be able to know or prepare something interesting. There is no net difference, other than how miserable you want to make divine casters to play.
Please define which spells are interesting to all players and which are not. Don't want to prepare breath of life? Don't.
Seems a bit......irresponsible to have a level 9 cleric and not have some way to usefully deploy BoL. It's not quite as simple as not preparing the spell. But as I said, this is a table variation that's easy enough to adapt to.

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

on topic: SLWS just seem too good for 5 gp. *shrug*

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Fresno aka Sarta

trollbill wrote:
Then why don't you explain what you said then because I see no way how a SLWS by itself can do anything to prevent the results of poor tactics, but I definitely see how BoL can.

Breath of Life is planning for failure. For another 135 Gold you can buy a Mithril Waffle Iron and plan for waffles. Waffles are far more consistent and the waffle iron reusable.

Ironically, with a level 14 Oracle and a level 11.2 cleric, I have only used Breath of Life once to save another character's life: my level 7 Sorcerer retrieved a BoL scroll from the adjacent dead cleric and made the DC 30 UMD check to save him.

I've had one character rescued with BoL. In Eyes of the Ten, when my oracle did something incredibly stupid (as he's prone to do), the Summoner in the party pulled a BoL scroll out of his Handy Haversack, foreseeing my demise. Fortunately, he managed the UMD check on the next round.

The SLWS can definitely help prevent the results of poor planning. My sorcerer uses his for a Wand of Grease (in case he gets grappled) and a Wand of Obscuring Mist (in case of magical darkness, enemies with reach weapons, or overwhelming ranged attackers).

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Will Johnson wrote:
The SLWS can definitely help prevent the results of poor planning.

Wouldn't that in itself be good planning?

Shadow Lodge **

Don't plan on failure but do plan for it. It will happen.

*****

Agreed with Jiggy and BNW. Other than the danger involved with the casting, the timing, and the cleric's action, it's essentially a life insurance plan that costs 14% of what a death would cost normally. That's not a bad price to pay at all.

Qadira ***

Will Johnson wrote:
The SLWS can definitely help prevent the results of poor planning. My sorcerer uses his for a Wand of Grease (in case he gets grappled) and a Wand of Obscuring Mist (in case of magical darkness, enemies with reach weapons, or overwhelming ranged attackers).

I would submit that it is the Wands that prevent the results, not the SLWS, as both of those can be used for the same purpose without a SLWS. The SLWS just makes them easier to use.

Andoran ***** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Fresno aka Sarta

trollbill wrote:
I would submit that it is the Wands that prevent the results, not the SLWS, as both of those can be used for the same purpose without a SLWS. The SLWS just makes them easier to use.

Grease, yes. Obscuring Mist, not necessarily. If being riddled at range, I want to retrieve the wand, activate it, and move. Not moving means they can blindly shoot where I was.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Will Johnson wrote:
Obscuring Mist, not necessarily. If being riddled at range, I want to retrieve the wand, activate it, and move. Not moving means they can blindly shoot where I was.

If you don't have the SLWS, you draw the wand, activate it, and take a 5ft step. If the archers want to fire blindly, they now have to pick one of 9 squares, and then face the 50% miss chance after that. That's about a 5.5% chance of having their attack roll even matter. I submit that this is not materially different than getting to move multiple spaces after activation.

Qadira ***

Rusty Ironpants wrote:


um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

on topic: SLWS just seem too good for 5 gp. *shrug*

* shrug *

With an unarmed strike I can do 1d3 non-lethal damage while critting only on a 20 and provoking an AoO and not threatening adjacent squares. For a mere 2 GP I can buy a mundane dagger that does 1d4 lethal damage, crits on a 19-20, doesn't provoke an AoO and threatens adjacent squares. That's ridiculously cheap compared to spending a feat on Improved Unarmed Strike and works better.

*shrug*

Qadira ***

Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

trollbill wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.

Relevant. Range is 30 ft., single target.

Osirion *** Venture-Lieutenant, Colorado—Denver aka Rusty Ironpants

trollbill wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.

Check the FAQ. It uses the range of Channel and applies the effect of Breath of Life i.e. your 6d6+ of channeling can bring someone back from the dead within 1 round. It also changes channel to a full round action that provokes AoOs.

FAQ wrote:

Channeled Revival: What is the range of this ability?

It uses the range of your channel energy ability.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 07/09/13

Qadira ***

Walter Sheppard wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.
Relevant. Range is 30 ft., single target.

Well, that certainly makes it a much more worthwhile feat than I thought it was.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Washington—Eastern Washington aka WalterGM

Rusty Ironpants wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.
Relevant. Range is 30 ft., single target.
I don't think it states that it is a single target.
Quote:
Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell (Core Rulebook 251).

The wording of "a dead creature" indicates a single target to me.

Although I could be wrong.

Osirion *** Venture-Lieutenant, Colorado—Denver aka Rusty Ironpants

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
trollbill wrote:
Rusty Ironpants wrote:

um.. Channeled Revival anyone? Breath of Life in a 30 foot burst.

Also, I don't think that Feat works that way. It just says you can use 3 uses of channel energy to effectively cast Breath of Life.
Relevant. Range is 30 ft., single target.
I don't think it states that it is a single target.
Quote:
Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell (Core Rulebook 251).

The wording of "a dead creature" indicates a single target to me.

Although I could be wrong.

I read it again an realized it was still unclear (to me at least). Sorry to delete the post you replied to, but I posted in the rules forum thread so I wouldn't derail this thread any more.

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Captain, Netherlands—Leiden

Who cares about scrolls of breath of life as anyone can use this. No need for UMD, no need for concentration, no need for SLWS.

Spring loaded wrist sheaths are very good, but does it break the game if you got 2 items (from a very limited selection) you can draw for free?

Cheliax ***** Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Auke Teeninga wrote:
Spring loaded wrist sheaths are very good, but does it break the game if you got 2 items (from a very limited selection) you can draw for free?

For 5 gp?

And when that limited selection keeps getting pushed?

If the description actually limited the selection, it would be fine. "You can store a wand or dagger within this and retrieve it as a swift action." That would end it. But by calling it "items such as" you are opening up a whole 'nother world.

As has been pointed out there are magic items that are MORE limiting that cost thousands of gold.

So, again, game breaking? No.

Too good for its cost? Yes.

Silver Crusade *

Auke Teeninga wrote:

Who cares about scrolls of breath of life as anyone can use this. No need for UMD, no need for concentration, no need for SLWS.

Spring loaded wrist sheaths are very good, but does it break the game if you got 2 items (from a very limited selection) you can draw for free?

The answer is no, but many people find them objectionable, nonetheless.

****

nosig wrote:

Long ago, in a 1st ed. home game, my players and I decided that a person should be able to carry a few things "on belt". We actually refered to it at "on belt items". These items were gotten easily, quickly, and were normally carried in small belt pouches. (picture a policemans belt - which was what we modeled it after).

In PFS we can't have that. Right? I can't have a shieth designed to hold a wand, and a belt pouch added to hold that potion I just might need "at hand". We have something called a wrist shieth. And you can only carry one thing in it, and you can (normally) only have two on your person.

PRD wrote:

Draw or Sheathe a Weapon

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.

If you argue that a scroll can be put in a spring loaded wrist sheath, then the same argument works with drawing a scroll within easy reach while moving.

****

If you've looked into real-life spring loaded sheaths, even with today's technology, they:

- only work for the specific knife they're designed for (which won't have a blade longer than 100mm, generally). Good luck putting anything else in it and expecting it to function.
- are really dangerous. You have a blade with a bunch of springs behind it, held by a small catch. One bump and you risk cutting yourself and dropping the knife.
- as a consequence, you need to be very careful around them, restricting your movements.

If anyone can show me anything to the contrary, please show me a link.

Qadira ***

Mekkis wrote:
nosig wrote:

Long ago, in a 1st ed. home game, my players and I decided that a person should be able to carry a few things "on belt". We actually refered to it at "on belt items". These items were gotten easily, quickly, and were normally carried in small belt pouches. (picture a policemans belt - which was what we modeled it after).

In PFS we can't have that. Right? I can't have a shieth designed to hold a wand, and a belt pouch added to hold that potion I just might need "at hand". We have something called a wrist shieth. And you can only carry one thing in it, and you can (normally) only have two on your person.

PRD wrote:

Draw or Sheathe a Weapon

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.

If you argue that a scroll can be put in a spring loaded wrist sheath, then the same argument works with drawing a scroll within easy reach while moving.

Well, personally I have never quite understood how pulling a rolled up scroll from my belt is harder than pulling a wand or a mace.

Osirion **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A SLWS with a Breath of Life Spell, I personally do not think that this is an issue. If you say that is, then something like the First Aid Gloves would perk up some interest of "Must Have" items. 4500g for two Breath of Life, or a various amount of other healing.

Should the Clear Spindle Ioun Stone inside a Wayfinder be banned as well? It clearly puts the NPC combatants in a disadvantageous situation, especially since many are of Evil Alignment. If it is considered this powerful in terms of PFS, would you increase the price of it?

How about Mistmail? It gives casters an automatic 20% miss chance, and since it converts to mist, no weight. With Mage Armor, this makes it where you have an all-day long Blur with +4 AC. Costing 2250g, should this be banned?

There are a lot of things that could be considered overpowering, but a SLWS seems to give players reminders that there are more actions in their repretoir. If people can only play with a move action, a standard action, or a full round action, how much of a disadvantage would our builds be by not utilizing all of our resources?

Qadira ****

trollbill wrote:
Mekkis wrote:
nosig wrote:

Long ago, in a 1st ed. home game, my players and I decided that a person should be able to carry a few things "on belt". We actually refered to it at "on belt items". These items were gotten easily, quickly, and were normally carried in small belt pouches. (picture a policemans belt - which was what we modeled it after).

In PFS we can't have that. Right? I can't have a shieth designed to hold a wand, and a belt pouch added to hold that potion I just might need "at hand". We have something called a wrist shieth. And you can only carry one thing in it, and you can (normally) only have two on your person.

PRD wrote:

Draw or Sheathe a Weapon

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.

If you argue that a scroll can be put in a spring loaded wrist sheath, then the same argument works with drawing a scroll within easy reach while moving.

Well, personally I have never quite understood how pulling a rolled up scroll from my belt is harder than pulling a wand or a mace.

cause it's in a scroll case (or it probably got ripped/destroyed) and you have to take it off your belt, take it out of the case, and unrolling. That takes longer than drawing a wand and pushing the "go" button.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mekkis wrote:
If you argue that a scroll can be put in a spring loaded wrist sheath, then the same argument works with drawing a scroll within easy reach while moving.

I don't understand how you're getting to this conclusion. The qualification for use in the sheath is "forearm-length item". The qualification for drawing on the move is "weapon-like". How are these equivalent?

***

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

What if the scroll were very very sharp?

In all seriousness I've never really understood why a scroll that was accessible could not be drawn as part of a move action. I just attribute it to one of the many quirks that happens when you apply a rigid system to represent something.

It makes sense to me that a small scroll could fit into a wrist sheath pretty easily, and that it could be spring loaded. Especially since these scrolls are made out of vellum which is pretty tough stuff.

Also if people are so worried about spring loaded wrist sheaths ruining action economy shouldn't they also be upset about mounted combat?

This has happened multiple times now for my Samurai Order of the Tome

GM: and that is a total of X damage
Player 1: Ok I'm dead
Me: Dead as in down or dead dead?
Player 1: dead dead.
GM: Ok Mahtobedis your turn
Me: I'm going to ride my axe beak around the really big monster provoking attacks of opportunity as I go. I am not going to take cover behind my mount this time because I"m going to need that action.
*AoO is resolved*
Me: Ok now I'm gambling that they do not have combat reflexes, I'm going to make a ride check to dismount as a free action (easily passed), and then I will draw one of the 5 breath of life scrolls I was given from my dedicated healing scroll bandolier. Caster level check, anything higher than 5, got it.

201 to 250 of 513 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath 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.