I think I just killed a dog in it's sleep and I feel like s*#~ :C
I swear if this was avoidable I'm gonna hate myself.
Veronica won't, she's dealt with the consequences of guard dogs but I love dogs and nooooooo.
I wanted to add that if it looked old or not guard doggy she wouldn't do it, but that wasn't her.
She is a woman looking for her daughter. This dog was risking that. Now everyone's gonna hate her!
I'm freaking out a little. Just me. Stupid RP forcing me to type how my character unflinchingly kills a sleeping dog.
Meh. A dog trained by Lamm is no friend of ours. If you're really too squeamish, we could try sneaking around the back. What's that? Me? Why don't I kill it? Uh...
I'm, uh, not very strong.
A coup de group is an auto hit, auto crit.
I wasn't going to risk not hitting it, definitely not going to risk not hitting it and then risk it regaining consciousness later.
I just hope I actually killed it.
Oh true. You're right. Maybe one of us should consider investing in a sap if we're gonna keep this sort of thing up. We can't be cruel to all animals.
Urhal would probably have a better shot at one hitting it. Maybe we should've had him go? Oh well, too late now...
You said it doc. Not much I can do until I know how the dog plays out. And it's not really the place for banter or other social interaction, given that we're trying to be quiet.
Oh no! Any plans I had to read the adventure and spoil everything are completely ruined!
Kidding. I forgive you. I'm sure it'll be fine. I know I've done that as a GM countless times...
I have no non lethal. I'm gonna see how Urhal does before I declare anything.
You can attack with the butt of the pistol or end of the rapier, it's just -4 to hit unless you're Urhal.
Argh! I completely forgot Tasche isn't actually a martial character. Oh well. I just remembered.
Time to be the wizard this party deserves...
@Veronica I would, but I feel my strength penalty means I have very very little chance of actually helping that way.
Don't forget that we're using the Feat Tax Rules, so Weapon Finesse is a granted feature.
Oh right. I am not doing well for knowing my character options thus far. Sorry. I'm going to review my sheet and be more careful.
Dude I don't know what 31 will get me but I'm gonna reveal in it until the GM gives results.
|
I feel like although you rolled amazing on your lie, it's extremely unlikely what your tried to lie about.
And this is where things get grey...
I honestly don't know what to have them do, so I just decided to go hostile... Not like it would have changed anything the second you encountered someone else,
Also, please note what information you have that I DIDN'T give out.
I never said the dogs name, so you knowing it sorta throws stuff off...
|
I definitely understand the grayness and difficulty of attempting bluffing/diplomacy during battle... hardly ever works... so I totally agree with how all that went down. BUT, you totally did say Bloo's name. I mean, the guy didn't know that we heard his yelling through the door, but it was kinda obvious that the dog's name was Bloo so it was a smart move for Veronica to use it.
Yah you said we heard shouting and him say
"Swear you mongrels are more dogs than Bloo!"
Since my character has an 18 intelligence I figured she could put two and two together.
But too late now, we've just had some random guy scream and break onto the scene so stealth is gone anyway.
XD
Let's just hope those children don't have proficiency in improvised weapons or some sort of drug bonus to hit :P
Dat nat 20 dough.
Well rolled Urhal!
Is that the first crit of the game? Well done Urhal!
We really have lost the stealth approach, huh? I just hope we find Lamm before he disappears into the night. Perhaps we should split up. Or perhaps not.
I wouldn't worry Veronica. I expect most of them to run from the screaming monster. I hope. Otherwise we're all gonna be taking a lot of -4's.
Our hands are tied. We can't do anything until the GM tells us how our most recent actions went.
So, I'm not saying we should split the party, but I'm also not saying we shouldn't...
|
|
GM, in response to what you wrote in the gameplay thread.
That was only two blows actually (two hooves), that third damage was the critical hit portion.
Natural attacks are weird and written poorly in the rulebook. I read up on it quite a bit when I was designing Arratu. This is my understanding-- if it is the same attack type- like two hooves- there is no penalty for using both of them at the same time.
If I was using two attack types-- like a gore, followed by two hooves-- then the gore would attack normally and the two hooves would attack at -5 each.
The hooves, because they are they same attack type, are linked and always use the same attack bonus.
It really isn't clear. But I think the best evidence for this is that in stat blocks of monsters, it will always list 2 claws or 2 hooves as having the same attack bonus.
HOWEVER, where I think I messed up, is that hooves are considered "secondary attacks". They do not get full strength bonus, but rather get 1/2 strength bonus each. The means you probably should subtract of 9 from the damage I did that goon (3 for one hoof, 6 for a critical hoof)
A gore, as a primary attack, would get 1.5 times the strength bonus.
Arratu can't gore and 2 hoof yet, since his skinchanging ability only gives one of these things at a time. But in later levels I am hoping to take a feat to have both.
Does all that make sense?
|
|
I found a couple of more things to help:
this one: http://www.archivesofnethys.com/MonsterDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Kirin
This is a monster that has a gore and 2 hoofs. The hoofs get the same to-hit bonus.
and this: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/53539/how-to-read-2-claws-in-a-path finder-monster-stack-block?noredirect=1&lq=1
And this is link talking about how 2 claws get the same to-hit bonus.
|
|
Ok, reading yet more. This is all very confusing. That is because no monster out there has 2 hooves only as their attack. They always have first the gore attack as a primary, and then the hooves as secondary. I am very strange in having 2 hooves with no gore, and so I don't fit into the rules at all.
To simplfying things, GM, how about this? Until I advance in levels at least, I will stick to goring things only and not do the hooves.
That means a single attack that does 1.5 strength damage. That is totally in the rules. Crystal clear.
If you want you can retcon my first attack to just do 11 damage. That is how much I would have done if I had simply done a gore attack.
|
|
Horses have just hooves, and if I remember correctly they still count as secondary weapons... Although I think horses also have a bite attack but I'd have to check to make sure...
Just do what you have been(adjusted damage of course) and I'll roll with it, and for the sake of easy transition I'll still keep the previous damage, it's hard trying to patch things up after the fact.
Also, from now on basic cartridges are separated into three ammo groups: Pistol, Rifle, and shotgun shells.
This keeps folks from using the universal "oh I have a pistol so I'll just stick my ammo from that into my shotgun."
Black Powder Inquisition gives Gunsmithing. Under "Guns Everywhere" rules, Gunsmithing is turned into Gun Training.
It's actually a rule for Gunslingers, but I'm pretty sure I asked about it applying to other cases of Gunsmithing being received as class feature or similar, and receiving approval. If I'm confused, please let me know.
I forget, would brawlers be proficient with guns using your gun rules DM Waz up?
|
|
Yes, one handed guns are simple weapons, two handed martial, and those I specifically specify as Exotic (these include literal hand cannons or early automatic guns.)
Wizards, sorcerer, and monk are the only ones I listed as not proficient with guns.
Although some others arent as well, but none of your classes are Witches, Psychic, or Kineticist.
|
|
Black Powder Inquisition gives Gunsmithing. Under "Guns Everywhere" rules, Gunsmithing is turned into Gun Training.
It's actually a rule for Gunslingers, but I'm pretty sure I asked about it applying to other cases of Gunsmithing being received as class feature or similar, and receiving approval. If I'm confused, please let me know.
Oh nice! I was really trying to figure out how you got the dex damage, I was reading about it and couldn't figure it out. I wasn't blaming or anything but figured it was something that I missed. Trying to be a student of the game.
I'm gonna pocket the wand for now, and the big gun if no one else has any objections. We should probably divy up the rest of the weapons based on what we can use and what we'll sell, and create a communal money pool.
Dex to damage would be really nice. It's what's making me really consider a spellslinger wizard dip. I would lose a level of magus casting though, so I'm still not sure.
Yes it does. Thank you very much.
Yeah, I agree. Do you mind if I add a value column so we can approximate how much everyone is carrying?
Rules question: I have a ranged weapon bond, which functions as a wizards favoured weapon. At somepoint, it may be appropriate to designate a slightly higher powered gun as the bond. Am I paying 200 gold per level and performing the ritual to designate another one? I think that's what the rules are saying, but it doesn't really talk about just wanting another item.