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


Off-Topic Discussions

4,701 to 4,750 of 6,833 << first < prev | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | next > last >>
Director of Sales

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Evan Tarlton wrote:
Is Cosmo really an avatar of the Elder Gods?
Honestly, I don't usually go over that far on that floor...but when I do, I bring an elder sign.

Yes, he is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow. Thanks for all the answers Mark. that's a lot of questions answered in not much time. Still kinda curious about the future of the Brawler, but damn that's a lot of insight and information. Kudos.

Gisher wrote:

Hmmm. I haven't checked new spells for this feature.

I checked AoN and d20pfsrd which theoretically should be updated through armor master's handbook and I couldn't find anything.

In general the reasoning makes sense, still feels very strange that the ability does so little without archetypes or other tricks.

Tempted to houserule it to work for minutes/level and hours/level too for my own games.

Protoman wrote:
Person of Interest is an excellent show.

PoI is great. I feel like it starts to drag a bit after a few seasons but at the very least it does hold its own pretty well for a while.

But I eat up all of those intrigue shows like candy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
and Pathfinder Adventures

Can you use your seedy underworld connections to tell them to get the steam/phone version out sooner?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hello,

Since I can't find a FAQ which seems to address this, does Swift Alchemy apply to extracts and mutagens? Or is it limited to things which one has to use Craft(Alchemy)?

Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Mark, just a thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions, even when backlogged so much. That really means a lot!
Rysky wrote:
Yeah, Thankies Mark ^w^

I want to chime in with these. That you try is both amazing and humbling. And please: don't get burned out. I know that being an internet figure can be exhausting and stressful, and you have a lot of people putting expectations and whatnot... but I'm just thankful for your polite and awesome efforts.

Thank you!

You're most certainly welcome. It can definitely be exhausting and stressful being an "internet figure" as you say sometimes. But I do enjoy chatting with you guys!

And us with you!

Also, with your recent description of Young Justice, it certainly moved higher up the que... maybe even next! (Maybe even "now"... except it's struggling against Parks and Rec, Farscape, and Seven Deadly Sins (an anime). That said, it probably just bumped Justice League, Case Closed, and Power Puff Girls (as I've either seen them or don't have the focus for subtitles during the summer.

I'm also glad you liked my recommendation! As someone had followed only my positive "live reaction"-type posts, but was disappointed, as a result, I wanted to clarify to make sure you can judge it fairly!

Heh, if my little brother's description to me of how many episodes of Detective Conan exist is correct, anything that is after Case Closed/Detective Conan on your list is likely to be waiting quite a while.

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:
I think I remember hearing it's on American Netflix, but if you haven't seen it yet, Person of Interest is an excellent show.

This recommendation is uncanny, as I cracked open a few episodes of this show earlier this week, thus proving that The Machine is real and you've been monitoring my Netflix, Mr. Finch. Kudos for finding me even though I was using an "alias".

I didn't mention it in my other post because it wasn't really a new series or movie I was looking forward to (as per question) so much as something I was tentatively exploring right now.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
and Pathfinder Adventures
Can you use your seedy underworld connections to tell them to get the steam/phone version out sooner?

I actually don't have any connections or special advantages, other than receiving a beta test invite (and that advantage is now over). I'm just a player out for gold, same as you. I've heard (while looking for fixes to glitch issues at launch that caused it to freeze permanently) some emulators work OK on computers, but it's been mixed.

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
N N 959 wrote:

Hello,

Since I can't find a FAQ which seems to address this, does Swift Alchemy apply to extracts and mutagens? Or is it limited to things which one has to use Craft(Alchemy)?

It says it works for alchemical items, where "items" on its own generally means gear and equipment. The term "alchemical items" is used to mean alchemical gear or equipment in a fair number of other places, notably the gear and equipment section of the APG itself: "This chapter presents all manner of mundane and exotic equipment for the PCs to purchase and use, from weapons to armor, alchemical items to masterwork tools" and never, to my knowledge, to include alchemical class features, so I would assume that the class is using the common usage for now.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

:(


Re: Case Closed - oh, he is almost certainly correct. Netflix only has a little bit of it, though. "Episode 1" on Netflix is really something insane like episode some-hundred-forty-five. It only goes for a while before stopping - presumably at the end of a character arc, but I don't know. Considering the thing started in '94, and hasn't stopped or even really slowed down since then, I'd guess it's impossible to "catch up" to it... unless they actually offered dubs (which, sadly for my lifestyle, they do not*).

* I like subs, a lot. But in my current lifestyle dubs are vastly superior, as they allow me to listen and look as-needed, rather than forcing me to pay attention the whole episode long.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

This is of course implying that almost six years after its second printing the APG is ever going to get an errata. :P I'm actually pretty sure that some of the special weapon and armor abilities that got errataed in APG have not gotten updated in UE.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Re: Case Closed - oh, he is almost certainly correct. Netflix only has a little bit of it, though. "Episode 1" on Netflix is really something insane like episode some-hundred-forty-five. It only goes for a while before stopping - presumably at the end of a character arc, but I don't know. Considering the thing started in '94, and hasn't stopped or even really slowed down since then, I'd guess it's impossible to "catch up" to it... unless they actually offered dubs (which, sadly for my lifestyle, they do not*).

* I like subs, a lot. But in my current lifestyle dubs are vastly superior, as they allow me to listen and look as-needed, rather than forcing me to pay attention the whole episode long.

Yeah, I'm with you for the most part. I tend to be doing 1 or 2 other things at the same time whenever I am watching TV, so it's pretty important to me to not need to read subtitles or I can't do that. A lot of shows I "watch" in that way are not good enough to be worth giving up the multitasking.

Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashram wrote:

This is of course implying that almost six years after its second printing the APG is ever going to get an errata. :P

Who knows? It depends on whether people buy them all, I guess. But one of my pushes for us is to make it clear when there's something we'll definitely need to errata next time when/if it happens. Not even counting the fact that it's a good tag for future errata, FAQs are in a special situation I've mentioned several times in this thread where smart awesome players are coming to two (or more) different conclusions, and thus no matter what the answer, some people might be upset the FAQ goes the other way. Mentioning that we're going to errata something in the FAQ is the best I can think of as a sort of acknowledgement that everyone involved was awesome, and nobody was "wrong" (the ones who aligned with the FAQ can feel they were right because that was the FAQ, and the ones who didn't have saved face because we agreed with them that the original text could lead [or even flat-out does lead] to their interpretation and it needs a fix).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Are Klars anywhere on your FAQ platter? I couldn't help but notice that post UE-errata they're still shields with armor spikes in that book even though they're referenced as spiked shields in the player companion printed around the same time as UE and other sources.

Which I assume either means that someone missed them while doing errata, that Paizo is happy with how they are now, or that something more comprehensive and involved is being planned.

Rysky wrote:
:(

Agree. I was really hoping this FAQ was going to go the other way and that they'd be allowed to stack.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark, could you pitch a new slayer talent that would mirror the Inquisitor Solo tactics ability. There are many Teamwork Feats that would fit the slayer but most people would not buy because you have to have another player that agrees to buy them.


Tacticslion wrote:

Re: Case Closed - oh, he is almost certainly correct. Netflix only has a little bit of it, though. "Episode 1" on Netflix is really something insane like episode some-hundred-forty-five. It only goes for a while before stopping - presumably at the end of a character arc, but I don't know. Considering the thing started in '94, and hasn't stopped or even really slowed down since then, I'd guess it's impossible to "catch up" to it... unless they actually offered dubs (which, sadly for my lifestyle, they do not*).

* I like subs, a lot. But in my current lifestyle dubs are vastly superior, as they allow me to listen and look as-needed, rather than forcing me to pay attention the whole episode long.

Mark Seifter wrote:
Yeah, I'm with you for the most part. I tend to be doing 1 or 2 other things at the same time whenever I am watching TV, so it's pretty important to me to not need to read subtitles or I can't do that. A lot of shows I "watch" in that way are not good enough to be worth giving up the multitasking.

Amen!

Mark Seifter wrote:
But one of my pushes for us is to make it clear when there's something we'll definitely need to errata next time when/if it happens. Not even counting the fact that it's a good tag for future errata, FAQs are in a special situation I've mentioned several times in this thread where smart awesome players are coming to two (or more) different conclusions, and thus no matter what the answer, some people might be upset the FAQ goes the other way. Mentioning that we're going to errata something in the FAQ is the best I can think of as a sort of acknowledgement that everyone involved was awesome, and nobody was "wrong" (the ones who aligned with the FAQ can feel they were right because that was the FAQ, and the ones who didn't have saved face because we agreed with them that the original text could lead [or even flat-out does lead] to their interpretation and it needs a fix).

This is... AWESOME. Thank you, sir. I think this is very important for assisting all in general. You guys rock.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mark, would you think a Trickster 1st tier path ability that changed the sneak attack die type from a d6 to a d8 and at 3rd tier, 3 additional dice would be added to the sneak attack dice pool and at 6th tier the die type would be changed to a d10.

do you think the above is over powered or would be fine?


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

It seems as though the question of whether or not guantlets actually count as unarmed attacks for the purpose of monk abilities, and even the amulet of mighty fist is still alive. It has come up several times in the forums.

Is this on the PDT "to do" list or do we need an FAQ?

I remember this one from before I worked here. I seem to recall seeing flip-flopping between books and vaguely remember a then-official post, but I'm not sure what happened exactly. An FAQ request could work.

Thanks. I had forgotten about this.

I have a rules question for you.

Let's say someone cast a fog spell centered on themselves. Let's also say the caster can see through this fog. Now the rules say the opponent on the outside has no way to bypass the fog cloud's statement that vision is blocked beyond 5 feet. This means the caster can not be seen.

If the caster whose sight is uninhibited were to make a ranged attack against the person who can not see him, would the opponent who can not see the caster lose dex to AC or would you say that even if you can not see someone you still get dex to AC.

I am asking because someone believes that "not being able to see someone" is not enough, and they did say dev input would matter.

This was my last stand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
N N 959 wrote:

Hello,

Since I can't find a FAQ which seems to address this, does Swift Alchemy apply to extracts and mutagens? Or is it limited to things which one has to use Craft(Alchemy)?

It says it works for alchemical items, where "items" on its own generally means gear and equipment. The term "alchemical items" is used to mean alchemical gear or equipment in a fair number of other places, notably the gear and equipment section of the APG itself: "This chapter presents all manner of mundane and exotic equipment for the PCs to purchase and use, from weapons to armor, alchemical items to masterwork tools" and never, to my knowledge, to include alchemical class features, so I would assume that the class is using the common usage for now.

Thanks for the quick response.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

So this means that barbarians who don't have any DR at all can't take the Increased DR Rage Power to get some?

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ZanThrax wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.
So this means that barbarians who don't have any DR at all can't take the Increased DR Rage Power to get some?

Correct, though that was also correct even before the FaQ.

In cases where it says "increase" instead of "bonus" they'll usually have a specific clause stating if you're allowed to increase from 0. IDR is not one of those cases.

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

Are Klars anywhere on your FAQ platter? I couldn't help but notice that post UE-errata they're still shields with armor spikes in that book even though they're referenced as spiked shields in the player companion printed around the same time as UE and other sources.

Which I assume either means that someone missed them while doing errata, that Paizo is happy with how they are now, or that something more comprehensive and involved is being planned.

The armor spikes thing with spiked shield was just something we missed when collecting errata from UE (most threads/posts that noted an issue noted that the issue was with the inconsistent price, if I recall, and didn't mention the armor spikes thing). Unless you mean that klars actually have a separate issue beyond the "armor spikes" on spiked shield thing in UE?

Designer

Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, could you pitch a new slayer talent that would mirror the Inquisitor Solo tactics ability. There are many Teamwork Feats that would fit the slayer but most people would not buy because you have to have another player that agrees to buy them.

I wouldn't recommend a slayer talent that mirrors the inquisitor solo tactics ability. That's a pretty iconic ability for the inquisitor and quite powerful too if used correctly. It seems better as an archetype that swaps out something (perhaps a bunch of slayer talents and the ability to take ranger combat style as slayer talents, though that's just spitballing and not vetted) for both solo tactics and some bonus teamwork feats.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.

I'm pretty sure that Increased Damage Reduction would work for a Skald's Damage Reduction(Ex) class feature. But, I'm not sure that it would work for the skald's allies that receive damage reduction and rage powers from the Inspired Rage raging song. Do you have an opinion one way or the other?

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
This is... AWESOME. Thank you, sir. I think this is very important for assisting all in general. You guys rock.

When people have stake, it's important to give everyone involved that encouragement as we can. It's one small thing I thought of to help in that regard, and it's hard to come up with more ways to do it.

Pondering on an example idea that might seem like it would help but wouldn't help:
For instance, one forum-proposed idea related to the same concern that would not actually help (and in fact would probably make things worse) would be to solicit forum advice directly before actually making the ruling. The reason people propose, I suspect, is that the proposer would prefer a ruling that didn't match the FAQ ruling, and their considered narrative involves the proposal changing the ruling to match their preferred ruling, which would simply lead to the same issue from the other direction, but with more anger between the posters before that during the soliciting advice period (the increased grar would come not just from the spotlight, but also from the perceived higher stake of the situation, since at that point the posters are much more directly lobbying for their position and thus more incentivized to polarize). Generally, you guys have already done an absolutely fantastic job hashing out both sides' points in threads on the boards, which we can read in order to see those points.

I think the best way to help with these things is to have people come together and realize that they all have solid opinions, even when they don't match the FAQ, and that they should run the way that best matches their group.

Group dynamics and harmony with houserules vis-a-vis FAQs:
With that perspective and considering group harmony, if ruling A would cause serious problems for some groups but also might not be a problem in others, whereas ruling B won't cause any problems for either group but the groups that have no problems with ruling A would prefer ruling A over ruling B, it's probably better for us to issue the conservative ruling B. In theory, both ways can be fixed by a group making the right ruling for themselves. With ruling A, the groups for which it causes problems can remove the rule entirely or make up their own ruling B. With ruling B, the groups that prefer ruling A can use ruling A. However, in the first situation, it isn't newbie friendly since it requires each group that encounters the problem to experience the problem, recognize the problem, and fix the problem on their own), and it can lead to discordance in a group (the person using a rules element that needs a group houserule to be more conservative has stake in not changing it and could be personally upset with their other friends if the group/GM make a more conservative ruling since it could feel like being anti-that player). Meanwhile, groups that prefer ruling A definitionally must be experienced groups that know what they prefer, and if the group/GM decides to houserule ruling A, it generally would lead to good feelings between the group members and the player using the rules element in question since it could feel like being pro-that player.

Either way, it's important for groups to take the answer that's best for that group, not just follow the FAQ. When people say "our group isn't following this FAQ", that's definitely a good thing!

I guess the takeaway is that it's a lot more fun to know your group and the balance of the challenges of your game and give them cool extra bonus stuff and special exemptions/beneficial houserules than it is to have to go around houseruling bans and adjustments after noticing and then identifying (if you can) the cause of problems in the game.

Looks like I went super long again. Oh well, in spoiler blocks to not make it a giant wall of text.

Designer

Lou Diamond wrote:

Mark, would you think a Trickster 1st tier path ability that changed the sneak attack die type from a d6 to a d8 and at 3rd tier, 3 additional dice would be added to the sneak attack dice pool and at 6th tier the die type would be changed to a d10.

do you think the above is over powered or would be fine?

As with the last, I wouldn't recommend mythic powers that add a lot of mathematical bonuses over letting you do something cool. Particularly here, this seems like it's quite a lot of damage for one ability (not that there aren't others that also give a large amount of damage, but this seems to eventually gives +36.5 damage per hit).

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

It seems as though the question of whether or not guantlets actually count as unarmed attacks for the purpose of monk abilities, and even the amulet of mighty fist is still alive. It has come up several times in the forums.

Is this on the PDT "to do" list or do we need an FAQ?

I remember this one from before I worked here. I seem to recall seeing flip-flopping between books and vaguely remember a then-official post, but I'm not sure what happened exactly. An FAQ request could work.

Thanks. I had forgotten about this.

I have a rules question for you.

Let's say someone cast a fog spell centered on themselves. Let's also say the caster can see through this fog. Now the rules say the opponent on the outside has no way to bypass the fog cloud's statement that vision is blocked beyond 5 feet. This means the caster can not be seen.

If the caster whose sight is uninhibited were to make a ranged attack against the person who can not see him, would the opponent who can not see the caster lose dex to AC or would you say that even if you can not see someone you still get dex to AC.

I am asking because someone believes that "not being able to see someone" is not enough, and they did say dev input would matter.

This was my last stand.

This is one of those cases that is a little confusing in the CRB that is clarified by the Perception/Stealth section in Ultimate Intrigue that covers the levels of awareness. Being aware of location but not directly observing (such as when you know where an invisible creature is standing but still can't see it) is not enough to let you keep your Dex bonus to AC; you need to be observing.

Designer

Grigorii wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Forecast for getting a FAQ today?
Juggling a few possible topics, but I think it's quite likely we'll get a FAQ, even if it's not the main FAQ in contention for the slot right now.

And here we go!

FAQ wrote:

Barbarian Increased Damage Reduction: The increased damage reduction rage power says it increases the “barbarian’s damage reduction”, but does that refer to the barbarian class feature “damage reduction” or to any damage reduction the barbarian might possess. In particular, the invulnerable rager archetype trades away the barbarian’s damage reduction class feature for a new ability called invulnerability that gives a slightly different form of damage reduction, so would the rage power work with that?

The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.
I'm pretty sure that Increased Damage Reduction would work for a Skald's Damage Reduction(Ex) class feature. But, I'm not sure that it would work for the skald's allies that receive damage reduction and rage powers from the Inspired Rage raging song. Do you have an opinion one way or the other?

Hmm...the skald gives the allies "this damage reduction" which means I think it actually is giving the DR from the class feature to them. So if the skald gets it, there's a reasonable premise that everyone does. However, I'm not so sure the skald gets it, since the skald's class levels count as barbarian levels for the rage powers and raging song counts as a rage, but the DR doesn't say it counts as barbarian DR. Probably as written the skald (and thus the allies) can't benefit from it, but I might allow it anyway, particularly if using the CRB version of the rage power for the skald.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mark,

Will we ever see another player-driven book like the Advanced Class Guide or Advanced Players Guide that expands on options for almost all classes?
On another note, will we ever see anymore alternate classes?

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh oh oh. One more question. Will the ninja receive an unchained version?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think more appropriately we want to know if Fighter will get any love. The Stamina system was a start, but it's a variant, and while Unchained classes are variants, most people don't treat them like them because they're meant to plug into any game. So...unchained fighter? Eh? EH?


Tacticslion wrote:
This is... AWESOME. Thank you, sir. I think this is very important for assisting all in general. You guys rock.
Mark Seifter wrote:

I think the best way to help with these things is to have people come together and realize that they all have solid opinions, even when they don't match the FAQ, and that they should run the way that best matches their group.

Group dynamics and harmony with houserules vis-a-vis FAQs:
With that perspective and considering group harmony, if ruling A would cause serious problems for some groups but also might not be a problem in others, whereas ruling B won't cause any problems for either group but the groups that have no problems with ruling A would prefer ruling A over ruling B, it's probably better for us to issue the conservative ruling B. In theory, both ways can be fixed by a group making the right ruling for themselves. With ruling A, the groups for which it causes problems can remove the rule entirely or make up their own ruling B. With ruling B, the groups that prefer ruling A can use ruling A. However, in the first situation, it isn't newbie friendly since it requires each group that encounters the problem to experience the problem, recognize the problem, and fix the problem on their own), and it can lead to discordance in a group (the person using a rules element that needs a group houserule to be more conservative has stake in not changing it and could be personally upset with their other friends if the group/GM make a more conservative ruling since it could feel like being anti-that player). Meanwhile, groups that prefer ruling A definitionally must be experienced groups that know what they prefer, and if the group/GM decides to houserule ruling A, it generally would lead to good feelings between the group members and the player using the rules element in question since it could feel like being pro-that player.
Either way, it's important for groups to take the answer that's best for that group, not just follow the FAQ. When people say "our group isn't following this FAQ", that's definitely a good thing!

I guess the takeaway is that it's a lot more fun to know your group and the balance of the challenges of your game and give them cool extra bonus stuff and special exemptions/beneficial houserules than it is to have to go around houseruling bans and adjustments after noticing and then identifying (if you can) the cause of problems in the game.

One thing I want to mention at you, however, is a warning strictly as a friend (insomuch as two strangers can be online): I suspect that you'll still receive a lot of blowback and grar from such things, even with this as your design goal because, often enough, despite it being your goal to allow a table to make more lenient decision while avoiding internal grar, it can easily feel like the PDT is telling those who came to a different conclusion than a FAQ that, "Your way is the wrong way to play; it's bad and you should feel bad." even when this is the opposite of your intent.

I tell you this, not because I do feel this way (as I recognize what you're doing, by hanging out here and listening to you), but as a fellow seeker of information and ever-greater communication. You've been really good at opening up transparency, and that helps a great deal. Thank you! But I want you to be prepared instead of blindsided and maybe understand if, in the future, people have a harsh response to the FAQs, that might be part of the issue.

(Also, again, this isn't me telling you that I feel like you guys are saying this; only that it can feel like this without adequate communication, or even with "adequate" communication, as text can be horrendous at giving clarity at the best of times. I think you're awesome - I'm only hoping to help avoid burnout!)

Mark Seifter wrote:
Looks like I went super long again. Oh well, in spoiler blocks to not make it a giant wall of text.

It's like we were twins separated at birth! ... if twins had different birth mothers and fathers, didn't look the same, had no biological ties whatsoever, and were born on different dates (well, I'm guessing on the last one), and the only thing they had in common was large posts! So, like I said, basically twins separated at birth! :D


Oh! For the record, Netflix has 52 Case Closed episodes, starting at episode 749, part of Season 23 (though it's listed as Season 1, Episode 1, on Netflix).

Episode Titles to keep track of things.
The Detective Conan Wiki by which I learned who everyone is.

Just thought you would like to know. :D

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Probably the Adult Swim version of it.


Rysky wrote:
Probably the Adult Swim version of it.

Ah! I'd never seen that.

(I used to watch Adult Swim, but never Case Closed - I suppose I no longer had tv when it was airing.)

As an aside: I suspect not, but is there any way that I can switch to dubs instead of subs on Netflix?

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

One thing I want to mention at you, however, is a warning strictly as a friend (insomuch as two strangers can be online): I suspect that you'll still receive a lot of blowback and grar from such things, even with this as your design goal because, often enough, despite it being your goal to allow a table to make more lenient decision while avoiding internal grar, it can easily feel like the PDT is telling those who came to a different conclusion than a FAQ that, "Your way is the wrong way to play; it's bad and you should feel bad." even when this is the opposite of your intent.

I tell you this, not because I do feel this way (as I recognize what you're doing, by hanging out here and listening to you), but as a fellow seeker of information and ever-greater communication. You've been really good at opening up transparency, and that helps a great deal. Thank you! But I want you to be prepared instead of blindsided and maybe understand if, in the future, people have a harsh response to the FAQs, that might be part of the issue.

(Also, again, this isn't me telling you that I feel like you guys are saying this; only that it can feel like this without adequate communication, or even with "adequate" communication, as text can be horrendous at giving clarity at the best of times. I think you're awesome - I'm only hoping to help avoid burnout!)

Don't worry Tacticslion, I totally get your tone and didn't take it the wrong way!

Agreed. Honestly (and not to discount the fact that your post was extremely insightful), I totally expect that. I pretty much know ahead of time when a particular FAQ will have a negative response (when readying people's rationales in the FAQ thread, I can see how heated the thread got to predict pretty easily how heated the response will be, regardless of the answer), and in fact if we ever have a small buffer where there's multiple available (which usually we don't but sometimes we do), I often tell the PDT something like "We've got two ready. Question A is higher up but is going to make more people angry if we answer it, whereas Question B is lower down but people aren't going to mind as much."

In essence, though, if we have to choose between increased strife within the group and increased grar at us, I personally think it's our responsibility to be the ones who take the grar. Your group is full of in-person friends who you interact with regularly and try to tell amazing and fun stories together. Meanwhile, the grar is definitely something sad for us to see, but it's still something on the internet, and it's only affecting a much smaller number of people (just us). As the ones who work on the game, I think it's our responsibility to let your fellow players and GMs get to be the nice ones in the equation; as sad as it might be for us, because passing the buck of that disharmony onto you guys would be selfish of us, imo.


Well, whether I like a given FAQ or not, I want you guys, at least, to know that we've got your back, agreement or otherwise! God bless you guys, and thanks for working so hard! :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hi Mark! Got a quick question regarding the Duelist's Vambraces.

Item description:
DUELIST'S VAMBRACES
Price 8,000 gp; Aura moderate abjuration; CL 8th; Weight 2 lbs.
Made from a mix of sturdy steel and boiled leather, these vambraces grant a +1 deflection bonus to AC while the wearer is wielding a double weapon or two weapons (not including natural weapons or unarmed attacks). In addition, once per round, when attacking with an off-handed weapon, the wearer can reduce any penalties on attack rolls made with that weapon by 2.

CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
Cost 4,000 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, cat's grace, shield, creator must have the Two-Weapon fighting feat

The (unchained) rogue in one of my parties wants to know if the Vambrace is intended to work on multiple off-hand attacks?

There's a short thread discussing the question here, but there's no clear consensus.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow, that is a confusing item. It says "once per round" but then also says "attack rolls".


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I've got a question for you, as this has come up in one of my games, and I'd like to know your opinion (Not opinion and not a ruling) on it.

I have a player who has an animal companion (Acquired through feats) and would like to have his animal companion speak. He has raised it's intelligence to above three (Using an intelligence headband) to acquire the Gold Nodule Ioun Stone, which allows the user to understand, speak, and write one language. Would you agree that works for an Animal? And also, would you say that his animal is capable of Human-like Sentience?

Thank you for taking the time to read this! And I appreciate any insight you can bring.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Hey Mark, I've asked about this in the rules forums a while back but got contradicting answers. What range can the kineticist's wall infusion appear in and what shape(s) can it take? Every other wall effect gives the exact options for shapes but the infusion only gives the dimensions. Also the infusion says it must appear within 30 feet but does this mean the entire wall must be in 30 feet or just some part of it? By the strictest interpretation that it can only be a vertical plane and the entire wall must be within 30 feet the longer option (120 feet long and 10 feet high versus 60 feet long and 20 feet high) would be useless as the only way to achieve the maximum length of the shortest option is to drop the wall right on top of yourself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
The armor spikes thing with spiked shield was just something we missed when collecting errata from UE (most threads/posts that noted an issue noted that the issue was with the inconsistent price, if I recall, and didn't mention the armor spikes thing).

Awesome, good to know!

Quote:
Unless you mean that klars actually have a separate issue beyond the "armor spikes" on spiked shield thing in UE?

There's been some argument back and forth about the nature of the Klar's attack.

Basically whether or not the 1d6 slashing martial attack counts as the weapon's shield bash and can therefore benefit from shield bash feats or enchantments

Or whether the 1d6 slashing attack is entirely separate and you can also attack with it as a 1d4 piercing light weapon too.

And if the latter if that means you can TWF with one klar by using both attack modes.


Squiggit wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
The armor spikes thing with spiked shield was just something we missed when collecting errata from UE (most threads/posts that noted an issue noted that the issue was with the inconsistent price, if I recall, and didn't mention the armor spikes thing).

Awesome, good to know!

Quote:
Unless you mean that klars actually have a separate issue beyond the "armor spikes" on spiked shield thing in UE?

There's been some argument back and forth about the nature of the Klar's attack.

Basically whether or not the 1d6 slashing martial attack counts as the weapon's shield bash and can therefore benefit from shield bash feats or enchantments

Or whether the 1d6 slashing attack is entirely separate and you can also attack with it as a 1d4 piercing light weapon too.

And if the latter if that means you can TWF with one klar by using both attack modes.

Interesting idea. But can your main hand also be your off-hand?

Silver Crusade

Hi Mark, I want to make sure I am doing mythic spell casting right. I cast a quickened spell on my turn then a spell with my standard action then on my opponents turn I cast another mythic spell that says that I can cast it with an immediate action.

Is this right? Can I use a metamagic rod on the second spell?

Silver Crusade

Mark, does an amulet of undetectable alignment mask ones aura if you have an overwhelming evil aura, My character is an 16th level inquisitor mythic 1 Hierophant custom devil that is lawful evil.


Mark, have you ever played Mongoose Legend? What did you think of it (if you did play it)?


Hey Mark, so this may have been asked before and I may have missed it but with the aether kineticist what influenced the decision to make the force blast composite blast deal damage as a simple blast?
Also was the decision really necessary, 2 burn seems much steeper (not completely unreasonable but still quite steep) price when it's only half the damage of everything else at its tier, is the fact that force damage is hard to mitigate really worth that much?
I would love to hear your opinion's on the matter and get your perspective if you don't mind.


Hi Mark,

I posted some random questions about how Delay Kinetic Blast works here but I think the timing of the post was bad and it got buried while everyone was off at PaizoCon/Roll20Con.

If you have any answers to those questions, I would be highly appreciative :D Thanks!


Lou Diamond wrote:
Mark, does an amulet of undetectable alignment mask ones aura if you have an overwhelming evil aura, My character is an 16th level inquisitor mythic 1 Hierophant custom devil that is lawful evil.

Well, if you're just custom-making an amulet that has constant undetectable alignment on it, then yeah, that spell has no restrictions about the actual strength of your aura.

There is also the ring of mind shielding which does the same thing and a little more.

4,701 to 4,750 of 6,833 << first < prev | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 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.