claudekennilol |
3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Size increases and effective size increases: How does damage work if I have various effects that change my actual size, my effective size, and my damage dice?
As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack, so if you have multiple size changing effects (for instance an effect that increases your size by one step and another that increases your size by two steps), only the largest applies. The same is true of effective size increases (which includes “deal damage as if they were one size category larger than they actually are,” “your damage die type increases by one step,” and similar language). They don’t stack with each other, just take the biggest one. However, you can have one of each and they do work together (for example, enlarge person increasing your actual size to Large and a bashing shield increasing your shield’s effective size by two steps, for a total of 2d6 damage).
Strong Jaw For 7 minutes, Leryn’s bite attack does 4d6 damage. Adowyn
can also use this spell on allied monks or those with natural attacks,
increasing the character’s effective size by two categories.
OFFENSE
Melee bite +11 (2d6+10 plus trip)Feats Broken Wing GambitB, Coordinated ShotB, Improved Natural Attack
(Bite), Power Attack, Weapon Focus (bite), Wounded Paw GambitB,ACG
Base damage for a wolf that size is 1d8. INA makes it 2d6. As written, Strong Jaw increases it to 4d6 (2d6 -> 3d6 -> 4d6). But with the new FAQ Strong Jaw supercedes INA making it 1d8 -> 2d6 -> 3d6.
As printed (which is available to everyone) or as FAQ'd (which is only available to those of us that frequent the forums or are made aware of it by those of us that do frequent the forums)?
The Fourth Horseman |
My understanding is that the FAQs clarify the rules, so what the FAQs say are the rules.
No one's going to hold it against someone if they don't frequent the website and don't know about the FAQ (and so they run/rule something FAQ'ed wrong) but once they know about the change, they should adjust accordingly.
Sebastian Hirsch Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria |
Fomsie |
Until this is fixed on the downloadable character sheet, I'd actually run the pregen as written, just like we don't remove the Samurai's illegal feat.
Flagged for PFS FAQ as there's now TWO pregens with actual mechanics problems.
Or the Skald with Weapon Focus at Level 1 (Requires a +1 BAB)
Or the Shaman is at around 74 pounds of gear carried with a max load of 70, has her stats change from 8 strength and 8 dex at level 1 and level 4, to 7 strength and 10 dex at level 7, even though the penalties applied to her AC, Initiative and Weapon Attacks are based off of the original 8 and 8. If her Str is actually 8, she could then move as her max load goes to 80.
Point is that the pregens often have mistakes in the form of typos or oversights... not that something like that SHOULD get past QC/editing, but it does... and like what this FAQ changes, they are usually minor and easy to fix on the spot (Or play as written)
claudekennilol |
I'd just run as written.
It's not like it'll cause an influx of players going out of their way to play them.
Ezren has an illegal feat as well, and I think I've seen him maybe twice during my almost 3 years of PFS.
For those that would run it as written, if someone at the table has their own hunter, and not a pregen, would you run it the same way? If they referenced this pregen, specifically, would that make it any different?
Sebastian Hirsch Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria |
Nefreet wrote:For those that would run it as written, if someone at the table has their own hunter, and not a pregen, would you run it the same way? If they referenced this pregen, specifically, would that make it any different?I'd just run as written.
It's not like it'll cause an influx of players going out of their way to play them.
Ezren has an illegal feat as well, and I think I've seen him maybe twice during my almost 3 years of PFS.
Well that Hunter pregen already has some pretty sweet language reagarding not bringing the pet, the "real" hunter, does not have that option.
claudekennilol |
claudekennilol wrote:Well that Hunter pregen already has some pretty sweet language reagarding not bringing the pet, the "real" hunter, does not have that option.Nefreet wrote:For those that would run it as written, if someone at the table has their own hunter, and not a pregen, would you run it the same way? If they referenced this pregen, specifically, would that make it any different?I'd just run as written.
It's not like it'll cause an influx of players going out of their way to play them.
Ezren has an illegal feat as well, and I think I've seen him maybe twice during my almost 3 years of PFS.
That's a good point, they are different in that aspect, at least.
Overall this doesn't really affect me as I don't have anyone that has a pet with INA and Strong Jaw, I just liked the combination.
Game Master |
It was my understanding that this new FAQ is only intended to supersede existing rules when the rules do not cover it. I don't know the list offhand but there's several instances where the pre-existing damage die increases/decreases aren't covered by the rules outside this FAQ - I thought the FAQ was intended to cover those "corner cases" only.
claudekennilol |
It was my understanding that this new FAQ is only intended to supersede existing rules when the rules do not cover it. I don't know the list offhand but there's several instances where the pre-existing damage die increases/decreases aren't covered by the rules outside this FAQ - I thought the FAQ was intended to cover those "corner cases" only.
I'm with Nefreet, it covers practically everything. Where are you getting the impression that it doesn't?
Gilardes |
claudekennilol wrote:Well that Hunter pregen already has some pretty sweet language reagarding not bringing the pet, the "real" hunter, does not have that option.Nefreet wrote:For those that would run it as written, if someone at the table has their own hunter, and not a pregen, would you run it the same way? If they referenced this pregen, specifically, would that make it any different?I'd just run as written.
It's not like it'll cause an influx of players going out of their way to play them.
Ezren has an illegal feat as well, and I think I've seen him maybe twice during my almost 3 years of PFS.
The real hunter can go feral and not bring a pet as well.
Not to derail the OP.
SCPRedMage |
The real hunter can go feral and not bring a pet as well.
Not to derail the OP.
Hunter: I'm playing a hunter!
GM: What's your animal companion?Hunter: I don't have one.
GM: What?!? You have to have one!
Hunter: Fine, I have a snake. Before the scenario begins, I shoot it until it dies. I no longer have an animal companion.
GM: ...
Sebastian Hirsch Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria |
Sebastian Hirsch wrote:claudekennilol wrote:Well that Hunter pregen already has some pretty sweet language reagarding not bringing the pet, the "real" hunter, does not have that option.Nefreet wrote:For those that would run it as written, if someone at the table has their own hunter, and not a pregen, would you run it the same way? If they referenced this pregen, specifically, would that make it any different?I'd just run as written.
It's not like it'll cause an influx of players going out of their way to play them.
Ezren has an illegal feat as well, and I think I've seen him maybe twice during my almost 3 years of PFS.
The real hunter can go feral and not bring a pet as well.
Not to derail the OP.
Yeah, but retraining cost is prohibitively expensive, the pregen hunter can decide not to bring his fully trained animal companion to a mission into the plane of fire. And the pet will be waiting for her, ready for the first mission.
Feral Hunter is more of a permanent choice, and can't be combined with the archetype that grants fast healing (thus we see a lot of squished insects), I would prefer a hard and fast rule, that allows hunters not to bring their animal companions.