Pathfinder #17198 here. I'll plug in the premade tomorrow when I'm more awake (I live on Euro time and right now I'm sorta running on fumes...)
|
Pathfinder #13260-3
Magora Magesblood is an forlorn elven female, evident by her dark moods and short worded responses. She has a couple of small complicated looking enclosed baskets attached to her backpack, inside which can been seen the skeletal remains of a toad, a snapping turtle, a bird, and a snake.
When asked about them, she tells you in a sad voice, "Past pets that couldn't handle the stress, but I have a good one now", as she reaches down to scratch a small Compsognathus behind it's head. "This is Five.
|
Ajax is a human Garundi ranger. He has white hair and an black puma (small cat) as an animal companion.
Ajax is always trying to anticipate and plan ahead. He's always got a theory about what's going on and why it's happening...even if he's not always right. Ajax is also big on working as a team and leveraging people's abilities to their fullest.
As a player, I love to work together. Delay, Ready, flank, share wands, etc. The better the player play, the easier it is on the GM not to kill us :)
@Magora
I love witches, especially those with Fortune hex. Fortune Hex + Rapid Shot = a whole lotta damage.
|
|
@Riley,
Never seen the dueling swords before, eager to see your build in action.
I was curious why your init seems +2 higher than I can figure out and was also wondering where the +2 shield bonus comes from?
As an FYI, Expert Duelist doesn't work on Touch Attacks, so don't know if you included it in your Touch AC.
|
|
At this point, I'm done answering questions. If DaWay wants to question legality, he's welcome to do so in a PM.
You need to chill out Riley. Nobody's calling you a cheater or making accusations, it's called curiosity. There's tons about the game I don't know and one way to learn is to examine people's builds to see how things can be done. As I stated before, I've never even seen someone with an Aldori archetype, god forbid I should be curious.
...ah. The Agile magic quality. Didn't even know about that.
|
|
You are correct, you cannot Take 10 when distracted or in immediate danger. But I'm not really sure what you mean by "initiative rounds." We haven't rolled init and there is no threatening NPC. Even so, there's nothing in RAW that says you can't Take 10 after you roll init. That's usually the case because per RAW you don't roll initiative unless you are in combat (which would prevent Taking 10/20). However, unless we are in immediate danger and are aware of it, or there is some external distraction e.g. a fire, collapsing building, etc, moving to structured rounds doesn't, in and of itself, preclude Taking 10.
Since you seem to be pretty busy, I'll post a question in the Hellknight thread and see if someone can clarify. You may be right that the scenario is precluding it, but there should be a specific IC reason that the PCs would be aware of.
|
|
@DaWay. The responses in the Hellknight thread say there is nothing in the scenario that precludes the use of Take 10 during the social scenes.
@Tyr,
GMs, like players often get confused by the rules. As an FYI, GMs cannot just make whatever rulings they want. This is strictly in violation of PFS guidelines. The requirement that GMs have to run scenarios "as written" and are precluded from making House Rules is why I play PFS and not random home games.
As a GM I get things wrong all the time and rely on players to correct me when I've misunderstood something. In my experience, the Take 10/20 rules are THE most misunderstood rules in the game.
|
|
While true, it's also the player's responsibility to defer to the judgment of the GM during an adventure. Conversations regarding these things can certainly take place, but if DaWay feels that this situation counts as a "stressful" encounter, then that's fine. He has the right to make that decision, and you are free to discuss it with him afterwards.
|
|
Yes. When things are not covered by the rules or there is some situation which the rules do not cover, the GM makes the call and the players abide by that.
That having been said,
walking into a dungeon where monsters and traps could kill you at any turn is "stressful." And yet, that doesn't preclude the use of Take 10. "Stressful" is not the requirement. There has to be a specific distraction. DaWay stated that we moved to "initiative rounds." I think we can easily trace the misunderstanding to a link between combat and initiative. If Daway has drawn a link incorrectly, this is an opportunity to correct that.
Taking 10 is a very important mechanic in a situation like this. It should not be removed from the table unless specifically required by the scenario.
If you would like to continue the discussion, please use PM's.
|
|
As someone who has ran or read almost every scenario/module/adventure path that Paizo has recently, I don't recall ever seeing an author specifically call out "Taking 10" in situation. It's a mechanic that is left up to GM fiat. If the GM determines it is a situation where Taking 10 or 20 does not apply, then that's the GM's choice. You may not agree with it, but you can discuss that privately with your GM, (taking your own advice) if you wish.
Otherwise, as a player, you should respect your GM's choices, even if you don't agree with them, and move on. If you can't do that, perhaps this (virtual) table is not suited for your play style, which you are not obligated to have to stick out a scenario if you aren't having fun.
|
I am looking at it from this point of view. You are essentially in initiative rounds even though I never had you roll it because it was a bit more free form because you are in a pbp game.
Two, your character is a ranger, he is used to the wilderness not high society balls, therefore, looking objectively at your character, you might be a bit 'stressed'
Three, if you took 10, on all your rolls you would fail your objective with this scenario. I was attempting to allow you to get the rolls you need without learning a hard lesson.
|
|
Three, if you took 10, on all your rolls you would fail your objective with this scenario. I was attempting to allow you to get the rolls you need without learning a hard lesson.
I appreciate the sentiment. Part of using Take 10 is to know when and when not to use it.
Two, your character is a ranger, he is used to the wilderness not high society balls, therefore, looking objectively at your character, you might be a bit 'stressed'
As an FYI, my Favored Terrain is "urban" so he's actually more at home in a city and in a building than out in the wilderness. One of his Favorite Enemies is Humans, so he's quite comfortable among people.
|
|
If DaWay doesn't mind, I would like to add some clarification to the Human Improvisation Feat. This came up twice for me at a convention I helped organize a couple of months ago.
Improvisation
You can figure out how to do almost anything.
Prerequisites: Int 13, Fast Learner, human.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on all skill checks for skills you have no ranks in. Furthermore, you can use all trained skills untrained.
Link
Skill Name section
Trained Only: If this notation is included in the skill name line, you must have at least 1 rank in the skill to use it. If this notation is omitted, the skill can be used untrained (with a rank of 0). If any special notes apply to trained or untrained use, they are covered in the Untrained section (see below).
Untrained Section
Untrained: This entry indicates what a character without at least 1 rank in the skill can do with it. If this entry doesn't appear, it means that the skill functions normally for untrained characters (if it can be used untrained) or that an untrained character can't attempt checks with this skill (for skills that are designated “Trained Only”).
The feat, Improvisation (Human Only), allows you to wave the Trained Only requirement of a minimum of 1 rank, that are part of the following skills. It unfortunately does not make you trained in those skills.
- Disable Device, Handle Animal, All Knowledge, Linguistics, All Profession, Sleight of Hand, Spellcraft, and Use Magic Device.
Some of the skills listed above, like Knowledge, provide further description of how the skill works, if attempted to be done untrained, by including limiting DCs or ways to by-pass those limits in their Untrained Section.
Link
Untrained: You cannot make an untrained Knowledge check with a DC higher than 10. If you have access to an extensive library that covers a specific skill, this limit is removed. The time to make checks using a library, however, increases to 1d4 hours. Particularly complete libraries might even grant a bonus on Knowledge checks in the fields that they cover.
So while the feat does allow you to use Trained Only skills, it does not make you trained in that skill. As you are untrained in the skill, you still are limited to the Untrained section of the skill description.
On the plus side, you do get a +2 untyped bonus to the skill check.Where the feat really shines is with the skills, Disable Device, Linguistics, Spellcraft, and Use Magic Device, as these skills do not have a Untrained Section in their description.
|
|
I researched this feat (and in fact, that very question) before taking it and that research conflicts with your interpretation, Magora. Though I agree it is worded oddly.
The way I read it and the way it was explained to me, the feat allows a character to waive the requirement that they must be trained in the skill. There's nothing in the feat which says the character must use the Untrained section of the skill. The "Trained Only" part of the skill is what Improvisation gives the character access to. Specific trumps general.
Knowledge skills, as you point out, are "Trained Only." In order to make a DC higher than 10, you must be trained in a skill. Improvisation waives that requirement.
Since Magora has confused the issue, I'll check with the online VC to clarify this.
EDIT:
Magora, look at this:
Bardic Knowledge (Ex): A bard adds half his class level (minimum 1) on all Knowledge skill checks and may make all Knowledge skill checks untrained.
If you're interpretation about K skills is correct, then Bardic Knowledge would not allow any bard to succeed on a K skill greater than 10. The bard would be limited to the Untrained rules because he is not trained.
|
|
Just remembered the Ranger Class has the same wording with regards to Favored Enemy:
A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.
I am of the opinion that the Ranger is not limited to a DC 10, despite being untrained, or this ability would essentially be worthless as the minimum DC of any uncommon creature would be 11.