>>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

5,101 to 5,150 of 6,833 << first < prev | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hi Mark, one question about slow-firing technological heavy weapon and Gunslinger's Dead shot deed.Are they compatible?
An 11th techslinger can treat heavy weapons as firearms to perform deeds. In most situations, heavy weapons are worse than a pistol for it can not be used to make iterative attacks.

Slow Firing wrote:
Slow-Firing: A slow-firing weapon requires a full-round action to use, and thus cannot be used to make iterative attacks.
Dead Shot wrote:
Dead Shot (Ex): At 7th level, as a full-round action, the gunslinger can take careful aim and pool all of her attack potential into a single, deadly shot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Any chance on an FAQ today?

Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

And now, for the more general FAQ on bloodragers spurred on by the specific one for dragon disciples:

FAQ wrote:

Bloodrager Bloodlines: Can a bloodrager use abilities that require sorcerer levels and relate to sorcerer bloodlines like robe of arcane heritage?

No. Some hybrid classes, like the brawler, have a class feature allowing them to use items related to their parent class, but the bloodrager doesn’t.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yay! Another FAQ Friday!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"No, you can't use a class specific item as a member of an entirely different class unless the rules say you can" seems like a pretty unnecessary FAQ. Isn't it sort of self answering?


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It might be more to the point to distinguish the reasoning between this FAQ and the Bloodrager/Dragon Disciple one. Mark's note the the Robe of Arcane Heritage FAQ is the more general case and the earlier FAQ was a specific exception is not in the FAQ itself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hi Mark, hope you're doing well!

I was wondering if I could get your take on a question - Phase Locking weapons affect their targets "as though" by the Dimensional Anchor spell. Does Phase Locking weapons check for Spell Resistance?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Weapons don't have to check against SR unless they are actually casting a spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since the Mythic Paths are pretty much based off an ability score and classes that correlate with them,if material were to be created for Occult classes, would it be better to expand the 1'st tier base abilities (Champion's Strike, Archmage Arcana, and so on) and add new path abilities to the current mythic paths or would it be better to created completely new paths for each occult class ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Alanya wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
here is a thread that says answered in FAQ but I'm not sure it is, do you know what's going on here?

Yeah, that's part of a very eerie thing. Maybe you can help me. When we were going through the ACG errata, there was some archetype that had basically that exact problem; it got bloodrager powers at the wrong levels in a weird way that was pretty much exactly the way it happened to eldritch scion, and I even thought it was eldritch scion. I brought it up to the PDT and we figured out the right answer, and it went into the errata. I'm almost sure of it, in that I remember it clearly. But eldritch scion doesn't have a listing in the errata at all, including in older versions I could find (also, apparently eldritch scion has other issues that people brought to my attention only after the errata were out, but that's not part of the eerieness). Can you think of another such archetype in the errata? I can't find one any more.

In any case, that was marked in errata erroneously due to my memory of it being in the errata. We can't unmark things though, the UI doesn't have that option.

Was this ever resolved? I'm building one now, and was curious how to handle this as I leveled up (not that it should be an issue for some time at the rate I've been advancing characters).
For the same reason I eerily remember it being in the errata (despite it not being there in any version of the file I found), I am sure of the answer we reached: you should get them in the spell-level order 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th (so the initial gained spell is in error and should be the 7th-level bloodline spell). I think I also remember pushing for getting the first one earlier and having them advance every 3 levels so it's steadier like for the bloodrager, but I don't remember the upshot of that. Then again, there's no evidence of any of my recollections on the...

Is there any reason this can't be fixed in a FAQ until an actual 2nd errata comes out for the book? Also, an observation on the 'makes sense' levels. The bloodrager gets the spells when it attains the next level spell... so it gains a 1st level bonus spell when it starts being able to cast 2nd level spells (at 7th level), bonus 2nd when it gets its first 3rd level spell (10th level) and so on. With that same scheme, the eldritch scion would get it's bonus spells at 4th, 7th, 10th, and 13th. - which seems to be in line with what you remember (gaining earlier - 4th - and advancing every 3 levels).

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

This week is a lengthy FAQ indeed!

FAQ wrote:

Weapon Attacks and Special Abilities: Many places in the rules use the term “ranged weapon attacks” and similar terms, but how does this apply to spells, spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities, and extraordinary abilities (heretoafter called special abilities) that require ranged attacks but might not necessarily seem like weapons?

In general, special abilities that require attack rolls benefit and suffer from all modifiers affecting attack rolls even if those modifiers mention weapon attack rolls (such as the penalty for firing into melee, the bonus on attack rolls from Point-Blank Shot and inspire courage, and the like), unless the spell specifically calls out that it doesn’t apply them (for instance spiritual weapon calls out that it isn’t affected by feats and combat actions, but it would still have to deal with cover, and firing into melee if ranged).
When it comes to modifiers that affect weapon damage rolls, or simply “damage rolls” (such as the bonus on damage rolls from Point-Blank Shot, inspire courage, and smite evil), special abilities that deal damage on a successful attack roll, apply them on hit point damage only, and only once per casting or use, rather than once per attack. For instance, if a spell or special ability launched a dozen different ranged attacks simultaneously, only one (of the user’s choice) would receive bonus damage. This doesn’t apply on area effects with the rare potential for extraneous attack rolls, like fireball. However, there is a category of abilities that deserve a special note: Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies).

In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.” The exception is abilities that deal damage when a creature touches or hits you in melee (for instance, the occultis’s energy ward focus power), which should also deal damage when a creature makes a melee touch attack against you but rarely call them out directly.

Certain special abilities (for instance rays, kinetic blasts, and mystic bolts) can specifically be selected with feats like Weapon Focus and Improved Critical. They still aren’t considered a type of weapon for other rules; they are not part of any weapon group and don’t qualify for the effects of fighter weapon training, warpriest sacred weapon, magus arcane pool, paladin divine bond, or any other such ability.

Abilities that modify the action usage of ranged weapon attacks or require their own special action almost never work with special abilities, since special abilities require their own actions. For instance, Pinpoint Targeting wouldn’t work with scorching ray or the soundstriker’s weird words because each of them requires its own action to activate and thus can’t be part of the feat’s specific standard action. Rare exceptions include mystic bolts and kinetic blade, which can specifically be used as part of other actions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Got another question for you, as this recently came up for... loud discussion at my table*. (*Virtual, but there were a lot of conflicting ideas.) Does the Warpriest Favored Class Bonus for Humans give just a Plain Combat Feat or is it referencing the Warpriest Bonus Feat Class Feature? In which case, in accordance to the Errata of FCB in Occult, would you only be able to take it starting at level 3? And on archetypes that replace the Bonus Feats, such as Sacred Fist which loses all but the 15th level bonus feat, would they have to wait until 15th level to take it?

Link to Warpriest Page

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
This week is a lengthy FAQ indeed!

Truly prodigious, in both length and scope.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
This week is a lengthy FAQ indeed!
Truly prodigious, in both length and scope.

Yeah, this has been one that has been tricky to answer, in part because some of these prodigous FAQs have FAQ threads that have discovered a few problematic symptoms but not the rest of the issue. I'm proud that we were able to handle this one, partially because I'm the one responsible for doing the research component to find those extra ramifications before we collectively make our decisions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”

Wait, does this mean that abilities that say "with a weapon" aren't intended to function with natural weapons?

Also seems to further cement that warlocks and kineticists using kinetic blade or devastating infusion can't benefit from haste by further defining uncategorized weapons as separate from natural or manufactured.

Liberty's Edge

Great FAQ.

However, one typo in the last sentence of the second paragraph; "...(for instance, the occultis’s energy ward focus power)". Should be ocultisT's.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
This week is a lengthy FAQ indeed!
Truly prodigious, in both length and scope.
Yeah, this has been one that has been tricky to answer, in part because some of these prodigous FAQs have FAQ threads that have discovered a few problematic symptoms but not the rest of the issue. I'm proud that we were able to handle this one, partially because I'm the one responsible for doing the research component to find those extra ramifications before we collectively make our decisions.

Well thanks for putting in the time. This FAQ answers a huge number of questions, including my question regarding the implications of Mystic Bolts for Arcane Strike. It turns out that I was wrong, but it's nice to have the issue resolved.


In regards to this FAQ and various kineticist abilities, does that mean that the feat Weapon Specialization won't actually work with a kinetic blast? More specifically, an Elemental Annihilator's Devastating Infusion, since the Annihilator has the option of choosing that feat as one of his/her bonus feats. It would be strange if they could choose the feat but couldn't actually use it.

Also, has there been a clarification on whether or not Haste affects kineticists? I know there are a few options, namely Flurry of Blasts and Flurry of Devastation that call it out specifically, but does that mean that the aerokineticist's Celerity ability won't actually grant her another kinetic blade/whip attack?

As a final question, I was still wondering if there's any clarification on whether Kinetic Fist's extra damage is multiplied on a critical hit or not. I can't seem to find a consensus on the forums on the issue (perhaps I'm not looking hard enough though) but most GMs I encounter seem to go by the rule that, because it adds dice and not a flat number, it's not multiplied. Could you clarify this for me?

Sorry for all the questions, and thanks as always! :D


The fearmonger Antipaladin archetype loses touch of corruption but keeps cruelties. Cruelties are useless without the touch though.

Do you know what was intended with this archetype?

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/alternate-classes/antipaladin/archetypes/pa izo---antipaladin-archetypes/fearmonger-antipaladin-archetype


My player and I are looking at the Psychokineticist archetype and finding it too penalizing to realistically play, especially since that lowered Will makes you more vulnerable to those than a standard kineticist, and any hostile emotion effect shuts you down.

In light of that, was there any reason for the doubled penalty on burn (-2 Will versus 1 Con's worth in nonlethal) compared to the standard kineticist, and what problems might come up if we houserule the penalty to being -1 instead?


Why is the caster level of a pearl of power 17? How is a 2nd-level wizard who finds one supposed to identify it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joana wrote:
Why is the caster level of a pearl of power 17? How is a 2nd-level wizard who finds one supposed to identify it?

I'm not Mark, but this FAQ might help with the first part of your question.

FAQ wrote:

Pearl of Power: What is the caster level required to create this item?

Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level.

However, it makes sense that the minimum caster level of the pearl is the minimum caster level necessary to cast spells of that level--it would be strange for a 2nd-level pearl to be CL 1st.

For example, a 3rd-level wizard with Craft Wondrous Item can create a 1st-level pearl, with a minimum caster level of 1. He can set the caster level to whatever he wants (assuming he can meet the crafting DC), though the pearl's caster level has no effect on its powers (other than its ability to resist dispel magic). If he wants to make a 2nd-level pearl, the caster level has to be at least 3, as wizards can't cast 2nd-level spells until they reach character level 3. He can even try to make a 3rd-level pearl, though the minimum caster level is 5, and he adds +5 to the DC because he doesn't meet the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.

So 17th level would be the minimum caster level to make a Pearl of Power for 9th level spells, but lesser Pearls could be made at lower caster levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ah, thanks. I was thinking I'd seen it discussed before but didn't realize it had been FAQed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
TrinitysEnd wrote:

Another question for you! This one about an Alchemist; Beastmorph to be exact. I've searched and searched and searched and couldn't find an answer for this, so I was hoping you could help.

Beastmorph has Beastform Mutagen, Improved BM, Greater BM, and Grand BM.

Do the abilities stack? So does a level 14 Beastmorph Alchemist get 1 from Alter Self, 2 from Beast Shape 1, 3 from Beast Shape 2, and 4 from Beast Shape 3? Or does it replace the previous one, giving only 4 abilities at level 14?

Thanks for taking time to look over this! And I hope you've been having a good week!

Edit: Almost forgot! How are the abilities, such as Poison and Web, calculated? Using the monster rules? Or do you treat it as a SLA and use Cha?

I'm wondering if the Devs have stepped back on answering questions like these? Or if life is just busy right now. No problem either way. Just was wondering if we could get some clarification or not. If not, I'll just go with the the Rules Forum (Where these questions have been asked several times with no definitive answer and both sides claiming their side is the common sense one.).

Thank you though for any and all insight you have given in the past and possibly future.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:

This week is a lengthy FAQ indeed!

FAQ wrote:
...

Hello, Mark,

Is there a way to have all the FAQs listed in chronological order ?

I wish to stay up to date with them but after some hiatus, the only way I could do that was to peruse your thread looking specifically for the FAQ posts and it takes a long lot of time, as well as the risk of missing one.

Thank you very much for all you bring to our game and community.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Is there a way to have all the FAQs listed in chronological order ?

There are a handful of non-FAQ (though generally still useful) posts mixed in, but otherwise;

This is the chronological list you are looking for

The Exchange

for kineticist in a home game, would making a basic acid blast cause any issues?

I am reflavoring wood to be coral and want to be able to stay in just one element...and corals do this cool thing where they throw their stomachs on neighboring corals, the first one to be digested loses.

Thanks for making this cool class, ive yet to play but I am already excited to try it out.


So, no Arcane Strike with natural weapons or unarmed strikes?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
Is there a way to have all the FAQs listed in chronological order ?

There are a handful of non-FAQ (though generally still useful) posts mixed in, but otherwise;

This is the chronological list you are looking for

THANK YOU SO MUCH

Now this only needs to be in a more obvious place ;-p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TrinitysEnd wrote:
TrinitysEnd wrote:

Another question for you! This one about an Alchemist; Beastmorph to be exact. I've searched and searched and searched and couldn't find an answer for this, so I was hoping you could help.

Beastmorph has Beastform Mutagen, Improved BM, Greater BM, and Grand BM.

Do the abilities stack? So does a level 14 Beastmorph Alchemist get 1 from Alter Self, 2 from Beast Shape 1, 3 from Beast Shape 2, and 4 from Beast Shape 3? Or does it replace the previous one, giving only 4 abilities at level 14?

Thanks for taking time to look over this! And I hope you've been having a good week!

Edit: Almost forgot! How are the abilities, such as Poison and Web, calculated? Using the monster rules? Or do you treat it as a SLA and use Cha?

I'm wondering if the Devs have stepped back on answering questions like these? Or if life is just busy right now. No problem either way. Just was wondering if we could get some clarification or not. If not, I'll just go with the the Rules Forum (Where these questions have been asked several times with no definitive answer and both sides claiming their side is the common sense one.).

Thank you though for any and all insight you have given in the past and possibly future.

Since Mark's posts here are entirely unofficial, I don't think you need to worry about delays in replies.

Best assumption: Mark is busy, probably with Starfinder stuff.
Second-best assumption: Mark has taken some time off.
Third-best assumption: Mark's a bit poorly after con season.
Fourth-best assumption: Someone did something to annoy Mark and he's stepped away from the forums for a bit to recover his equanimity.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Chemlak wrote:
TrinitysEnd wrote:

I'm wondering if the Devs have stepped back on answering questions like these? Or if life is just busy right now. No problem either way. Just was wondering if we could get some clarification or not. If not, I'll just go with the the Rules Forum (Where these questions have been asked several times with no definitive answer and both sides claiming their side is the common sense one.).

Thank you though for any and all insight you have given in the past and possibly future.

Since Mark's posts here are entirely unofficial, I don't think you need to worry about delays in replies.

Best assumption: Mark is busy, probably with Starfinder stuff.
Second-best assumption: Mark has taken some time off.
Third-best assumption: Mark's a bit poorly after con season.
Fourth-best assumption: Someone did something to annoy Mark and he's stepped away from the forums for a bit to recover his equanimity.

At times I feel I'm abusing the fact they are here and willing to answer. That and some of the other Devs have started turning away from answering rules questions.

But back on topic:
Mark, if you were stranded on a desert island, who from Paizo would you rather be stuck with? (And should we blame Cosmo for you getting stranded there?)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Any word about the gauntlet FAQ that is coming out soon?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For the purposes of calculating starting age what category to psychics fall into?

Intuitive, self taught or trained?

Or does it depend on the discipline? Lore perhaps being trained while self perfection would be self taught and rebirth could be intuitive?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TrinitysEnd wrote:
At times I feel I'm abusing the fact they are here and willing to answer. That and some of the other Devs have started turning away from answering rules questions.

Well, taking the three people most asked rules questions on these boards, there's James Jacobs, who fields rules questions to the design team, but is perfectly happy to answer how he would rule something as a GM; Jason Bulmahn, whose thread is very specifically for non-rules questions because as the head of the design team his decisions about the rules would always be taken as gospel by the rules nerds around here (including me!), so it's safer for him to just avoid answering them at all; and Mark, who has made it abundantly clear that anything he says in this thread is non-binding, his opinion only, what he thinks, and is completely subject to change.

Short point being that this thread is the one place where we can get someone from the design team's input into rules, and James Jacob's thread is probably the best place for sounding out a highly experienced GM who is always happy to pass along some pearls of wisdom as long as they don't include actual rules questions or design work.

Unfortunately we the community brought this situation upon ourselves (most specifically the rules nerds, like me), and have not only quite thoroughly turned the majority of Paizo's staff off responding to rules questions, even as a matter of opinion, but also (if my understanding of the situation is correct, which it might not be) made it policy that direct rules questions (as opposed to matters of opinion on how a rule functions, or how an individual would run it at their own table) should only be answered in any form of official capacity by the design team.

Anyway, rantish bit aside, if Mark wants us to stop asking, all he has to do is say so, which leads me to believe that at this moment in time it's okay, even if he doesn't have a chance to reply quickly (for whatever reason).

And since it's been a while, and I'm not sure if I ever actually asked...

Coffee or tea?
Coke or Pepsi?
Boxers or briefs?
What's the best Star Wars movie?
Favourite alcoholic beverage?
Favourite pizza?
Funniest thing that happened in the last 24 hours?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Non rules but still Paizo related:

What do you think of the team separation between types of books? Like do you think it's good/bad/weird/etc. that PDT doesn't really have any authority or influence over PPC or PCS books?

From the outside it seems strange that a good two thirds of the game's rulebooks don't have any consideration or ability to be revised by the design team, despite them all potentially being pretty crunch heavy, but you never get the whole picture when you're jut looking in from the outside.

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:
TrinitysEnd wrote:
TrinitysEnd wrote:

Another question for you! This one about an Alchemist; Beastmorph to be exact. I've searched and searched and searched and couldn't find an answer for this, so I was hoping you could help.

Beastmorph has Beastform Mutagen, Improved BM, Greater BM, and Grand BM.

Do the abilities stack? So does a level 14 Beastmorph Alchemist get 1 from Alter Self, 2 from Beast Shape 1, 3 from Beast Shape 2, and 4 from Beast Shape 3? Or does it replace the previous one, giving only 4 abilities at level 14?

Thanks for taking time to look over this! And I hope you've been having a good week!

Edit: Almost forgot! How are the abilities, such as Poison and Web, calculated? Using the monster rules? Or do you treat it as a SLA and use Cha?

I'm wondering if the Devs have stepped back on answering questions like these? Or if life is just busy right now. No problem either way. Just was wondering if we could get some clarification or not. If not, I'll just go with the the Rules Forum (Where these questions have been asked several times with no definitive answer and both sides claiming their side is the common sense one.).

Thank you though for any and all insight you have given in the past and possibly future.

Since Mark's posts here are entirely unofficial, I don't think you need to worry about delays in replies.

Best assumption: Mark is busy, probably with Starfinder stuff.
Second-best assumption: Mark has taken some time off.
Third-best assumption: Mark's a bit poorly after con season.
Fourth-best assumption: Someone did something to annoy Mark and he's stepped away from the forums for a bit to recover his equanimity.

It's usually my desire to answer more-or-less all the questions combined with a question somewhere that takes a long time to answer or I can't answer right then. I know if I skip that question, I'll just lose it, since my way of organizing them is to find my last post and go in order, and so that kind of stops me overall (it's never exactly the one I stop on that pauses me, either). Then I wind up not going back to them until I have enough consecutive cycles to handle the longer question, at which point I often power through a bunch of questions and catch up to date. It's a pattern that's happened a few times in the past, if you check the thread history.


S-... sorry! O.o


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark it seems as if we need an in depth blog on stealth. I know the rules were updated/clarified in Ultimate Intrigue, but there is still a lot of confusion.

How can the community specifically ask for a blog similar to the blog on poison, which has examples for people to go by?

I am opposed to asking specific questions, because it will lead to another question, which might take months or longer to get an answer, and it probably better to just handle it(as much as possible) all in one go.

Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Jason's out of the office today, so no FAQ this week (I did manage to get us set up so we could do a big one while he was at Dragoncon last Friday, though).

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okies, Thankies for the heads up :3


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Spellcraft wrote:
Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.

But PfRPG's Perception skill doesn't apply penalties to the skill check for those factors, like 3.5 did; rather, it grants bonuses to the DC the skill is rolled against.

So, by RAW, there is no penalty to a Spellcraft check (or bonus to the Spellcraft DC) for distance, poor conditions, etc. Correct?


Can grappling infusion be put on Singularity?

Silver Crusade

Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MichaelCullen wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Luthier's Rapier was a typo though, and the AP it showed up in had the correct WBL going off the correct price to begin with.

I believe they said the reason they didn't do so for the Jingasa is because the appropriate price would exceed 70,000g.

Lesser/Greater versions would definitely have been a good alternative though I believe.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Luthier's Rapier was a typo though, and the AP it showed up in had the correct WBL going off the correct price to begin with.

I believe they said the reason they didn't do so for the Jingasa is because the appropriate price would exceed 70,000g.

Lesser/Greater versions would definitely have been a good alternative though I believe.

...they think +1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is worth 1/3rd of a 15th level character's WBL?

*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*

Welp, my hopes of seeing some reasonably priced interesting items just died a little more.

Silver Crusade

Snowblind wrote:
Rysky wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Luthier's Rapier was a typo though, and the AP it showed up in had the correct WBL going off the correct price to begin with.

I believe they said the reason they didn't do so for the Jingasa is because the appropriate price would exceed 70,000g.

Lesser/Greater versions would definitely have been a good alternative though I believe.

...they think +1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is worth 1/3rd of a 15th level character's WBL?

*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*

Welp, my hopes of seeing some reasonably priced interesting items just died a little more.

You severely underestimate the usefulness of those two things together.


Rysky wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Rysky wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Luthier's Rapier was a typo though, and the AP it showed up in had the correct WBL going off the correct price to begin with.

I believe they said the reason they didn't do so for the Jingasa is because the appropriate price would exceed 70,000g.

Lesser/Greater versions would definitely have been a good alternative though I believe.

...they think +1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is worth 1/3rd of a 15th level character's WBL?

*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*

Welp, my hopes of seeing some reasonably priced interesting items just died a little more.

You severely underestimate the usefulness of those two things together.

And they drastically over-value them.

Silver Crusade

Tels wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Rysky wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, on the subject of Pazio revising released magic items. When Paizo changes magic items like the Jingsa of the Fortunate Solider. If Paizo thinks it is too good for the listed price why not just keep the Item the same and just raise the price to reflect how good the devs Believe the Item to be or make lesser and greater versions of the Item?

+1 to this.

Sometimes this happens though. Take Luthier's rapier. It now has now been raised to an appropriate cost.

I definitely favor this method. It preserves builds and just does not seem as jolting.

Luthier's Rapier was a typo though, and the AP it showed up in had the correct WBL going off the correct price to begin with.

I believe they said the reason they didn't do so for the Jingasa is because the appropriate price would exceed 70,000g.

Lesser/Greater versions would definitely have been a good alternative though I believe.

...they think +1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is worth 1/3rd of a 15th level character's WBL?

*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*

Welp, my hopes of seeing some reasonably priced interesting items just died a little more.

You severely underestimate the usefulness of those two things together.
And they drastically over-value them.

Not really with the chorus of people who clamored they would gladly pay 10x the original price.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

...

...they think +1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is worth 1/3rd of a 15th level character's WBL?

*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*

Welp, my hopes of seeing some reasonably priced interesting items just died a little more.

You severely underestimate the usefulness of those two things together.

+1 luck AC and 1/day crit negation is not worth as much as +6 Armor AC and +5 Deflection AC. That is just mindbogglingly stupid.

Actually, lets go a bit more in depth here.

+5 Deflection ring, +5 Natural Armor amulet, +5 Armor from Mithril Comfort Breastplate, +1 insight ioun stone is worth about 140kgp. That is a little under half of a 16th level character's WBL. That sounds like a reasonable fraction of a AC focused character's WBL to be spent on WBL boosters. Jingasa is going to eat half of that money, so the bonuses need to be reduced by at least 70kgp worth. The best way to do this is -2 on the Deflection ring, -3 on the amulet. That means that by the time a character literally runs out of other AC boosters to buy, the +1 bonus negates some of the horrific AC losses, and the 1/day crit negation comes at the cost of a flat 20% reduction to critical hits, and a flat 20% reduction to all other hits too, both of which are going to be a lot higher than they sound because of how additive miss chance works (which AC is a form of). It's probably more likely to negate 50%+ of crits and 50%+ of other hits all day every day. This is not a good trade.

Remember, for any character who hasn't run out of other AC boosters to buy and is willing to buy anything, this is absolutely the best case. Characters of lower levels have to give up even more. At level 13, a creature spending a similar amount of money on AC needs to give up all of their magical AC boosters in order to afford a Jingasa. Below that, it is pretty much unaffordable. The only time the Jingasa begins to look worthwhile is when a character is in 9th level spells territory and they have literally nothing else to spend that AC booster money on.

And as far as I am concerned, using "this is only worth considering when 9th level spells are online and you have gold coming out of your ears" as the baseline for item pricing is mindbogglingly stupid.

5,101 to 5,150 of 6,833 << first < prev | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Mark Seifter* All Your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.