| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
New year, clean slate and all that. Let's take this opportunity to root out the big rules issues that would benefit from a thorough treatment by the PDT.
Mounted Combat: Who needs feats X,Y and Z: The rider, the mount, both? (Coordinated Charge, Charge Through). Can you lance-charge AND have your mount Overrun the target?
Stealth, total concealment, 5' step: Does a 5' step count as "movement", allowing you a Stealth check? If you have total concealment, but your enemy doesn't, is he denied his dexterity bonus against your attacks?
When do you/don't you have a "free hand"? Is it the same as an empty hand?
These are all complicated questions; even if they're answered with yes/no replies, they have wide-ranging effects.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread would be a good opportunity to link to any pending FAQ requests. Like...
Pricing Mithral Armor for Unusual Creatures
Spellcraft and identifying "manifestations"
Bodyguard Feat (one FAQ to rule them all?)
And getting THIS added to the Golarion Rules and Questions FAQ, since it was answered in that thread.
Also getting SKR's explanation of charge lanes added to the FAQ would be nice.
That that's a question that can be asked almost 8 years after the game came out, and 16 years after the majority of the rules were written hurts me.
There are a lot of questions about Arcanists, especially in relation to magic items. It would really help if we knew if we should treat them as Spontaneous or Prepared casters in relation to items such as Ring of Spell Knowledge, Runestone of Power, Pearl of Power, Page of Spell Known, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One that has generated a few threads on occasion:
Greater Trip; is the AoO performed before or after the Prone condition is applied?
What is the base damage of a +1, Heavy, Spiked, Shield with the Bashing Enchantment? Does that FAQ actually invalidate the stat block of the Scarred Wanderer in the NPC Codex?
1d8 and yes. That spiked bashing shields were nerfed in the size increase ruling was not an accident.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
New year, clean slate and all that. Let's take this opportunity to root out the big rules issues that would benefit from a thorough treatment by the PDT.
Mounted Combat: Who needs feats X,Y and Z: The rider, the mount, both? (Coordinated Charge, Charge Through). Can you lance-charge AND have your mount Overrun the target?
Stealth, total concealment, 5' step: Does a 5' step count as "movement", allowing you a Stealth check? If you have total concealment, but your enemy doesn't, is he denied his dexterity bonus against your attacks?
When do you/don't you have a "free hand"? Is it the same as an empty hand?
These are all complicated questions; even if they're answered with yes/no replies, they have wide-ranging effects.
You don't even need movement to hide. It is a nonaction that usually happens as part of a move action. If I am already behind cover or concealment I can make the stealth check from that point and never move.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meanwhile, debating the details of what actually happens when you have Greater Trip doesn't seem appropriate to this thread. The question here is whether this question is debatable at all, and you and I seem to have demonstrated that it is.
For further reference, here are another 750 posts discussing this very issue
Some questions about the Kingdom rules from Ultimate Campaign. Okay, not really "big", but in the main they're officially unanswered (even if I'm sure I know the answers).
|
@Dubious Yak
Is this what you mean?
At 12th level, a shield champion can use her unarmed strike damage when dealing damage with a shield (whether in melee or thrown) or the shield's damage, whichever is greater.I would say that it would do the Shield Champion's base damage, 2d6, sized up by Bashing 2 places, so 4d6. That would be even if Casual Viking's interpretation of how Shield Spikes interact with the Bashing Enchantment is true. I would say the same thing about the Warpriest's Sacred Weapon Damage, but my opinion on this has been passionately contested by more than one contributor to these forums. And that argument has gone back to when Feral Combat Training let you apply your Monk Unarmed Strike Damage to your Natural Attack Damage, and then you took Improved Natural Attack.
Yeah, Dubious Yak, good question.
12th level is good to - but even before that Shield Bashing is covered by Close Weapon Mastery, so the damage the shield does is bumped up even at lower levels. I was mainly wondering if the damage bumps from Spiked/Bashing does actually increase the damage dice twice, or this was somehow prevented due to the fact that the dice were already increased due to Close Weapon Mastery.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, as shown above, Greater Trip is still a contested issue. ;)
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there still an issue about how acrobatics impacts charge lanes? Or has it been resolved?
I am thinking of a charge being prevented by a pit or wall that the charger could jump over.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
My take, here are the most common issues that should be addressed. I’ve linked one thread talking about them, but there are many threads for each issue.:
- Does Thunder and Fang allow you to use an earth breaker in one hand without a klar?
- Can you ranged sneak attack from flanking?
- Can you take Racial Heritage and count for that race in PFS race restricted rules?
- If you have a class feature in one class, are you considered to have the same class feature of the same name in the other class for the other classes other class features?
- Did they really mean to stop bashing shield bashes for more damage than an other 1 handed weapon in the game?
- Does Brilliant Energy ammunition bypasses total cover?
- Do feats and abilities that apply to "Ranged Weapons" also apply to spells?
- How does the offhand work with Armor Spikes, Sea-Knife, and Barbazu Beard?
- Do Hex require line of effect and/or line of sight like spells?
- If you use a throwing dagger as a melee attack is it still a ranged weapon?
- Does Racial Heritage give you a tail with Tail Terror?
- Do favored class bonuses get nerfed by the Spells Known FAQ?
- Does Greater Feint work for just you?
- How does Overrun interact with Charge, Elephant Stomp, Charge Through, and other things?
I just made this list quickly, if someone would like to spend the time to find the best (most clicked) FAQ for these issues? That would be a good use of time I think ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we just rewrite all the books (or just core) in rules terms. That way everything is still compatible as it's not a new version. Just writing things in more clear rule speech. Then it'd help us interpret future spoken written things.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Chess Pwn, actually I don't think that is a good idea. In terms of sales. While we would love to have rules more precise and clear, we are the minority I understand. More people just don't want to have so much complexity in their rules. People of the dev team have said as much in the past, that the rules are written less precise and more conversation to be more approachable to the larger group of players.
The thing though is there wouldn't be any "new" rules being made. And that is also why it'd be a separate book written in rule term just to make it clear what the rules actually are. This would also give more insight in future books that continue to be written in common.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing though is there wouldn't be any "new" rules being made.
Wouldn't it be easier and better to encourage them to increase the speed at which the FAQ are made or to some how get people to no bash a developer if they answer a rules question in a thread?
Kineticist:
Can Weapon Finesse be used with Kinetic Blade/Kinetic Whip? Is the answer any different for a Telekineticist? (Kinetic Whip in particular is debated)
This has been clarified multiple times by the writer since the beta. If you make your kinetic blade/whip a light weapon, it can be finessed. I've had melee Kineticist builds approved by the man himself that relied on Weapon Finesse to function.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing though is there wouldn't be any "new" rules being made.Wouldn't it be easier and better to encourage them to increase the speed at which the FAQ are made or to some how get people to no bash a developer if they answer a rules question in a thread?
I don't know if it'd be easier or better. Though I agree that either one achieves the desired result. The perk of my proposed idea is it's another book for them to sell, rather then "corrections" of a previous book.
And as long as developer's comments in threads aren't "rules binding" then we're not going to view them as rules. They are helpful for figuring out maybe RAI and maybe helping you lean towards one RAW interpretation over another. But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And as long as developer's comments in threads aren't "rules binding" then we're not going to view them as rules. They are helpful for figuring out maybe RAI and maybe helping you lean towards one RAW interpretation over another. But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you.
"RAW" is a farce. Two people can read the exact same passage and come to two entirely different conclusions.
And as long as developer's comments in threads aren't "rules binding" then we're not going to view them as rules. They are helpful for figuring out maybe RAI and maybe helping you lean towards one RAW interpretation over another. But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you."RAW" is a farce. Two people can read the exact same passage and come to two entirely different conclusions.
I agree, hence why I said "RAW interpretation" because I acknowledge that RAW sometimes have multiple valid interpretations.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you.
That is actually the root problem, it is why we even need developers to post official answers or we need a "Rules Compendium" type book.
If we didn't have this culture of people who have their Pet rules interpretation and won't accept anyone saying they might be wrong, we wouldn't need clarifications or a book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you.That is actually the root problem, it is why we even need developers to post official answers or we need a "Rules Compendium" type book.
If we didn't have this culture of people who have their Pet rules interpretation and won't accept anyone saying they might be wrong, we wouldn't need clarifications or a book.
More than that is the culture of PFS. With so much left to "ask the GM" really doesn't work for PFS. As, expect table variation is essentially, don't play unless you don't care about that ability. Thus with PFS being a "By the book" kind of mode you need a book to show that you're right or not. Like jumping over a pit, people thought you needed a 15ft jump if the 10ft pit wasn't exactly two square but in the middle of three squares. If you expect a 10 to always jump 10 feet (as was the rule), and suddenly you need 15 to jump 10 feet you'd want a source to point to and say, here's the rule.
So if PFS made some "GM calls" for stuff then I feel most wouldn't feel the need for an Official rule. But since they "wont make a rule" and only do "what is official" we need the FAQs.
people with pet rules interpretation doesn't matter really unless they are the GM.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
More than that is the culture of PFS.The "culture of PFS" is to make a ruling and move on with the game. PFS isn't the problem.
PFS is the problem. Everywhere else you'll have a more constant GM and can decide the rules. But take mounted combat. it's super risky to use in PFS since we don't have clear rules. If you think a rule means X, but all the GMs you encounter think it means Y, you're hosed.
Arguing with someone online doesn't matter, and a home game with a consistent group doesn't matter as much since you'd make a houserule to your way anyways if you wanted it that way. And you can talk about thing before trying to use them to know how they'll work.
Like the list James has earlier in this thread are all issues for a PFS player because they are a gamble for each game.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
PFS made some "GM calls" for stuff then I feel most wouldn't feel the need for an Official rule.
Yea I don't think PFS hurts this.
You might not have participated on the WotC forums from the 3.0 days right up to and into 4e days. I did. It was miserable.
Pretty much the only people discussing rules were the people supporting "RAW" and asserting that RAW leads to PunPun, moving to the moon and back in a single move action, getting 9 copies of daily spells per day, and all manner of other obnoxious things.
In the run up to 4e, I compiled a "Book of Heavily Debated Topics" forum post, as I called it. And most if not all of them got Ask Wizards/Sage Advice treatment before 4e was published and 3.5 was killed.
The whole concept of RAW should be killed instead. It doesn't make sense, since all actual games have a GM to determine what the rules mean.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
so if PFS isn't the problem then what's the big deal for "RAW" answers? "RAW" is only useful to have everyone have an equal and level understanding of how the game works. The only other place it matters is in PFS where "RAW IS LAW" is fairly accurate.
|
"The Greater Trip feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that you trip. The Vicious Stomp feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that falls prone adjacent to you. If you have both these feats and trip a foe, do you get to make two attacks of opportunity (assuming that you can)?One that has generated a few threads on occasion:
Greater Trip; is the AoO performed before or after the Prone condition is applied?
Yes, the two triggering acts are similar here but they are different. One occurs when you trip a foe. The other occurs when a foe falls prone. It requires a large number of feats to accomplish, but you can really pile on the attacks with this combination."
|
|
And as long as developer's comments in threads aren't "rules binding" then we're not going to view them as rules. They are helpful for figuring out maybe RAI and maybe helping you lean towards one RAW interpretation over another. But you can't site them as rules to someone who disagrees with you."RAW" is a farce. Two people can read the exact same passage and come to two entirely different conclusions.
This is true... the problem is when one of those people is obviously wrong or is purposely changing the rule for balance and then calls it an 'interpretation'.
You can't 'interpret' Weapon Focus to do anything but add +1 to hit when using the weapon associated with the feat selection. It doesn't add to damage, it doesn't make the weapon lighter.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is true... the problem is when one of those people is obviously wrong or is purposely changing the rule for balance and then calls it an 'interpretation'.
Which everyone does according to everyone else for various values of everyone else.
You don't even need movement to hide. It is a nonaction that usually happens as part of a move action. If I am already behind cover or concealment I can make the stealth check from that point and never move.
As long as no ones observing you.
"The Greater Trip feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that you trip. The Vicious Stomp feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that falls prone adjacent to you. If you have both these feats and trip a foe, do you get to make two attacks of opportunity (assuming that you can)?One that has generated a few threads on occasion:
Greater Trip; is the AoO performed before or after the Prone condition is applied?
Yes, the two triggering acts are similar here but they are different. One occurs when you trip a foe. The other occurs when a foe falls prone. It requires a large number of feats to accomplish, but you can really pile on the attacks with this combination."
Whether that FAQ supports your conclusion or not has been part of past debates. Remember that "tripping" may include falling prone, while "falling prone" may not include tripping. It is not as clear cut as you would think...hence the reason for the various threads across the years discussing this. :)
How does the Battlemind Link Spell function?
The fact it has a Mythic Version means it is meant for a moderate amount of use and practicality.
|
|
Whether that FAQ supports your conclusion or not has been part of past debates. Remember that "tripping" may include falling prone, while "falling prone" may not include tripping. It is not as clear cut as you would think...hence the reason for the various threads across the years discussing this. :)"The Greater Trip feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that you trip. The Vicious Stomp feat allows you to take an attack of opportunity against a foe that falls prone adjacent to you. If you have both these feats and trip a foe, do you get to make two attacks of opportunity (assuming that you can)?One that has generated a few threads on occasion:
Greater Trip; is the AoO performed before or after the Prone condition is applied?
Yes, the two triggering acts are similar here but they are different. One occurs when you trip a foe. The other occurs when a foe falls prone. It requires a large number of feats to accomplish, but you can really pile on the attacks with this combination."
I offered no conclusions. Only made bold a direct quote. A direct quote that specifically says the two actions "being tripped" and "falling prone" are two different things, though one follows the other in a successful trip attack.
But I will offer one here.
It doesn't matter if falling prone is part of a trip. Greater trip only matters during a trip. Imagine if somehow they didn't fall prone after a trip, they still provoke because they were tripped. The matter of falling prone is a non-issue.
Considering that you can not get two AOOs from one triggering action, then from the blog post/FAQ it is clear that Greater Trip happens before falling prone. Otherwise Vicious Stomp could not follow it when the target falls prone. It simply could not happen in the rules, making the FAQ completely incorrect if Greater Trip functioned after they fall prone.
If I were to ready an action based on "I do X if Y is tripped" and Y falls prone but is not tripped, I do not get to perform X.
But the readied action would happen the moment they are tripped, not when they've fallen prone. You'd have to ready for them falling prone to do that.
My point here is not to debate with you, but to show that such a topic has been hotly debated. Submission of the FAQ along with your conclusion that it is saying they are two different things does not change this. It is quite possible (and has been debated thusly by myself and others) that the assumption of "tripping" and "falling prone" being two different things is not what the FAQ is talking about. As suggested, tripping may very well include falling prone whereas we know that falling prone does not always include tripping.
If you disagree, then we can visit the various threads that have already debated this idea. There are a number of them.
This thread, however, is not designed to debate these points. It is to gather the assortment of unanswered questions that people have had. If you wish to debate the whole Greater Trip issue, you are free to do so on one of the old threads or start a new one.