|
I was making the point that it is not actually a grey area. The wording in the description only works if the gladius is considered a shortswort, and therefore, is an explicit and RAW, if indirect, statement that the gladius is a short sword.
Consider this the proper ruling: For purposes of weapon proficiency, a gladius is not a short sword.
Still seeing some gridlock here; who knew this would be so contentious??
I'm pretty sure EbonFist wins ties. He's a Venture Something.
Edit: LINK if you want it from the horse's unicorn's mouth.
|
In any case, a proper ruling would be useful.Consider this the proper ruling: For purposes of weapon proficiency, a gladius is not a short sword.
Going to completely disagree here.
"Feats and abilities that affect shortswords apply to the gladius."
Proficiency is an ability.
A gladius is a shortsword. It just has a heavier blade.
|
|
Agreed. It's NOT a short sword: it has piercing OR slashing (plus performance, for those who care...)In any case, a proper ruling would be useful.Consider this the proper ruling: For purposes of weapon proficiency, a gladius is not a short sword.
Why would feats and abilities that apply to a shortsword also apply to a gladius if it's not a shortsword?
|
Why would feats and abilities that apply to a shortsword also apply to a gladius if it's not a shortsword?Agreed. It's NOT a short sword: it has piercing OR slashing (plus performance, for those who care...)In any case, a proper ruling would be useful.Consider this the proper ruling: For purposes of weapon proficiency, a gladius is not a short sword.
Because it was badly written and was a mistake. Like the Jedi would say: forget it even exists. My uneducated guess: to allow a fighter or other PC with access to all martial weapons that already has all the short sword weapon focus/specialization feats to kick ass in a gladiator's arena (but not allow the same to another PC that doesn't have martial weapons, like a rogue).
You see? it's silly right? forget it exists.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, you asked for a clear ruling on something that is obviously an edge case and reserved for GM fiat. Your assigned Venture-Agent gave you one.
You didn't like the ruling that was given, so argument continued.
Now, your Venture-Captain is stepping in to uphold the original ruling.
A gladius is NOT a shortsword, though it can take advantage of feats and abilities that apply to shortswords. Therefore, a rogue cannot use a gladius without taking a weapon proficiency feat.
That is the ruling. If you still are unhappy with the ruling, please take it up with Jason Bulmahn or one his fine Ultimate Combat authors Tim Hitchcock, Colin McComb, Rob McCreary, Jason Nelson, Stephen Radney-MacFarland, Sean K Reynolds, Owen K.C. Stephens, and Russ Taylor. I am sure they will be delighted that content they put together over 15 years ago is still causing such a stir today.
Now, please accept the ruling, or not, but stop clogging up this channel with nonsense.
And finally...
Language is an imperfect thing, and the English language triply so. Trying to parse nuance to cover every possible edge case is a non-viable proposition, which is why the Society devs, in their wisdom, added in a clause that states that the GMs are the final arbiters at the table according to their best understanding of the rules.
|
|
Just saw the above; not seeing the "nonsense" in any of the preceding (PDK's unhelpful 2-bitz notwithstanding), but let's see if this is any easier:
Touch of blindness. I'm trying to figure it out (and if it's worth taking):
If a character has the BAB for multiple attacks in a round, can it deliver multiple magical touch attacks in a round (this would be very good to know in general, of course, would certainly help redeem chill touch in the face of Pathfinder's nerfing single-point ability-damage)?
If the answer is yes, then if, say, something gets poked three times in a single round with touch of blindness, and fails all three saving throws, would that mean it is then blinded for the next 3 rounds, or would that part not work that way?
|
|
Also, someone help me understand the intrinsic value of Tripping Staff, and indeed the "trip" weapon quality in general; one does not NEED specific weapons to perform combat maneuvers, so I'm a little unclear on what it adds (aside from the option of dropping your weapon to avoid having it turned on you, but that seems a little underwhelming on its own).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just saw the above; not seeing the "nonsense" in any of the preceding (PDK's unhelpful 2-bitz notwithstanding), but let's see if this is any easier:
Touch of blindness. I'm trying to figure it out (and if it's worth taking):
If a character has the BAB for multiple attacks in a round, can it deliver multiple magical touch attacks in a round (this would be very good to know in general, of course, would certainly help redeem chill touch in the face of Pathfinder's nerfing single-point ability-damage)?
If the answer is yes, then if, say, something gets poked three times in a single round with touch of blindness, and fails all three saving throws, would that mean it is then blinded for the next 3 rounds, or would that part not work that way?
(Q) Touch Spells: In the Magic and Combat chapters, it says that I can touch a single ally as a standard action or up to six allies as a full-round action and that I can combine delivering a touch spell with a natural attack or unarmed strike. But what if I just want to deliver the touch spell to an enemy? It just says I can do it “round after round.”
(A) Making a touch attack against an enemy by touching it, beyond the free action to do so as part of casting the spell, is a standard action. It can’t be used with a full attack.
A Magus can break this rule, using Spellstrike and Spell Combat. Touch of Blindness can certainly be used by a Magus with high BAB to Spellstrike more than once a round, but other than forcing more saves there's no benefit. Nothing in the spell description causes the duration to stack on multiple hits.
Regarding the Tripping Staff Feat, any Enhancement bonus on the weapon will also apply to Combat Manoeuvres that you make with it. That, and the clause allowing Spellstrike on a Trip if you're a Staff Magus, would seem to be the benefits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the devs wanted the gladius to count as a shortsword in all things, they could have said so. They didn't.
But they did, if indirectly. Though PFS tends to be it’s own thing, so contradictory rulings abound there. Not much concern of mine unless people start paying me to run it.
But the writing describing the Gladius includes a reference that only works if the Gladius is considered a short sword. We know this because if you swapped out “gladius” for “mace” then the sentence sounds wrong. Why, because the comparison made is of sort exclusively used for same category comparisons, therefore sticking an item in that phrase from a different category makes it sound odd to a native speaker.
That said, it is clear that the author felt it was so obvious that they didn’t think it needed clarifying. Happens a lot in writing.
Interestingly, most people don’t read into a text on such a level. I do though, and even analyzed bits of the regulations for the sergeants in my unit in the army when they were confused (my god does military regulations make the most complicated game rules seem simple).
So naturally, you get issues like this.
...continuing a conversation that a VC told you stop...
PM sent
|
|
A few spell-questions:
- I just want to clarify: ARE deity-associated spells like defending bone, haze of dreams, and Rovagug's fury available to non-worshipers of those deities? I understand race-associated spells are exclusive to those races.
- Timely inspiration: This one puzzles me, because it appears to only do anything once the caster has 5 caster levels (and only reaches its full potential of +3 at 15th level), yet is a 1st-level spell; it seems inconsistent with the rest of Pathfinder's spell-writing for this to be accessible at 1st-level, yet not have a minimum effect of +1 and be useless until 4 levels later; was there errata, or is there some saving grace I'm not seeing, or is it what it appears?
- Good old hideous laughter; what are its parameters of "type"? Does the saving throw bonus apply if, e.g., a Tengu casts it on a Gnome, or not because they're both Humanoids? If the former is true, suppose a Half-Elf cast it upon a Half-Orc?
- Here's a fun one: Coin shot - could the gold from a Noble Stipend be used for it (note that doing so would not be "spending" it in the usual sense)? If so, could one further declare some of the coins to be copper/silver/platinum so as to take advantage of their properties under the spell? For what it's worth, I don't think any of that would be game-breaking, especially considering the required prior investment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few spell-questions:
- I just want to clarify: ARE deity-associated spells like defending bone, haze of dreams, and Rovagug's fury available to non-worshipers of those deities? I understand race-associated spells are exclusive to those races.
As far as I know, the answer is Yes:
Many of the spells in this chapter originated with the faithful of a particular deity and are more common among the worshipers of that god. Such spells are denoted with the god's name in parentheses after the spell's name. Worshipers of the spell's associated deity always treat the spell as common, and need not research the spell in order to prepare or learn it. Despite this, all the spells in this chapter are available to members of other faiths, though some temples or religious organizations may proscribe the use of specific spells. Additionally, arcane spellcasters have unlocked the secrets of casting particular spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few spell-questions:
- Timely inspiration: This one puzzles me, because it appears to only do anything once the caster has 5 caster levels (and only reaches its full potential of +3 at 15th level), yet is a 1st-level spell; it seems inconsistent with the rest of Pathfinder's spell-writing for this to be accessible at 1st-level, yet not have a minimum effect of +1 and be useless until 4 levels later; was there errata, or is there some saving grace I'm not seeing, or is it what it appears?
- Good old hideous laughter; what are its parameters of "type"? Does the saving throw bonus apply if, e.g., a Tengu casts it on a Gnome, or not because they're both Humanoids? If the former is true, suppose a Half-Elf cast it upon a Half-Orc?
- Here's a fun one: Coin shot - could the gold from a Noble Stipend be used for it (note that doing so would not be "spending" it in the usual sense)? If so, could one further declare some of the coins to be copper/silver/platinum so as to take advantage of their properties under the spell? For what it's worth, I don't think any of that would be game-breaking, especially considering the required prior investment.
For Timely Inspiration: Since it doesn't have the usual "minimum +1" verbiage that often comes with abilities that scale, I would rule that it's using the always round down rule applied to levels in this case. Meaning round the required level down to get the appropriate bonus (1st-5th level = +1, 6th-10th = +2, 11th-15th = +3.)
For (No Specific Person's) Hideous Laughter, the bonus would not apply if any Humanoid cast it on any other Humanoid as they are both the same Type (Humanoid.) I would not apply the penalty if their Sub-Types are different or if they shared any Types.
For Coin Shot, I would rule that Noble Stipend cannot be used because, while it doesn't give an exhaustive list of the items you can use the gold for, the examples it gives do strongly suggest that they are for lifestyle items rather than utility items. For example, you can't use it to buy weapons, armor or equipment and the list of services it contains does not include contributing to spellcasting services. Though it doesn't outright say it, I get the impression that the money might not literally all be coin but might instead be perks and privileges of being noble, letters of introduction/credit, etc.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a Campaign Clarification for Noble Stipend. It just gives you 100gp at the start of each adventure, any remainder not used by the end of the adventure is lost.
There's a Campaign Clarification for Noble Stipend. It just gives you 100gp at the start of each adventure, any remainder not used by the end of the adventure is lost.
It also says this though: "Purchases and excess funds disappear at the end of the adventure."
That further suggests to me that it is intended for specific purposes that don't include spell components.
|
|
That further suggests to me that it is intended for specific purposes that don't include spell components.
The crux of this case, however, is that it isn't buying anything, and they're not a spell component, per se; technically, they're the target of the spell (and to say otherwise would be tantamount to demanding enchanted weapons roll to overcome SR). This is important because, by way of contrast, False Focus could not be used to replicate the coinage.
Though it doesn't outright say it, I get the impression that the money might not literally all be coin but might instead be perks and privileges of being noble, letters of introduction/credit, etc.
I buy this in general, but that doesn't mean there'd be no coins, especially since the default in Society-play is "RAW over RAI".
There's a Campaign Clarification for Noble Stipend. It just gives you 100gp at the start of each adventure, any remainder not used by the end of the adventure is lost.It also says this though: "Purchases and excess funds disappear at the end of the adventure."
I would draw a parallel between this and Society rules for animate dead and such; you can create undead with legal spells, cannot resell the requisite onyx once you've acquired it, and any undead created or taken command of goes away at the end of the adventure; might this not suggest that that above clause there doesn't itself restrict/impact how the money is expended during the adventure?
I'll bet there's real-life legal rulings about the implications of putting specie to uses other than commerce; probably doesn't matter here, but maybe still interesting.
It is my understanding that Noble Stipend is NOT intended to be used for adventuring purposes -
"...only on services and nonmaterial goods. Services and nonmaterial goods include the following.
Hiring entertainers, messengers, mounts, servants, transport, workers, and so on.
Improving your lifestyle quality (see Cost of Living on page 405 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook).
Obtaining invitations to exclusive events or entry into privileged locations.
Paying for lodgings, stabling, taxes, and tolls."
That wording, especially the "include the following" part tells me that it is intended only for those items or items similar to them. NOT items that would be useful for or used in combat.
I would let a character buy (or just rent since it would have to go back at the end of the adventure) a suit of clothing and maybe even a fancy weapon for a social encounter bonus.
I would NOT let a character rent a weapon, grappling hook, bomb or other piece of combat or adventuring gear with it.
Nor would I let a character use it to buy 100gp worth or diamond dust as part of a raise dead component.
This money is intended to improve your status and quality of life, not to improve your likelihood of continuing to have a life.
It's intended for "you have to have a particular outfit to attend the ball"
"The troll requires that you give them X amount of gold to cross the bridge or he attacks."
"You can sleep in the common room for X copper but X gold pieces will get you a more secure and comfortable room where you are less likely to get a bad case of lice or knife."
"Oh, you call yourself Lord Marshall but no Lord Marshall I've ever met would wear the same outfit to court twice."
Also, keep in mind that not everything ever written for Pathfinder, even the stuff that is allowed in Society Play was intended for Society Play.
Just because it's an option for the format doesn't make it a good option for the format. Nor does it mean that it's optimized for the way Society Play works.
A masterwork weapon is a finely crafted version of a normal weapon. Wielding it provides a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls. (Source)
===> Yes, it applies.
|
|
I just had another thought: Can you make a combat maneuver as an attack of opportunity, or is there some way a character can become able to do so short of anything super-niche like a specific class-kit? I imagine it would at least require the 'Improved [Maneuver X]' feat, but it seems like the sort of thing that one should potentially be able to do.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Generally yes, but it depends
Performing a Combat Maneuver: When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action.
Full text is on AON
Disarm for example takes the place of a melee attack, so you could use it.
Grapple is a standard action, so you couldn't.
|
|
The full list of options and their corresponding actions can be found on the "Table: Combat Options Overview" at the following link.
Also, from what I've heard, if you trip someone and they try to stand up, you may not be able to trip them as an AoO. Not sure how that works.
Also, from what I've heard, if you trip someone and they try to stand up, you may not be able to trip them as an AoO. Not sure how that works.
The reason for that one is that the AoO is resolved before the action which provoked it. So in the case of someone standing back up the AoO is resolved while they are still on the ground and so can't be tripped (but you could use the AoO to perform a different maneuver which can be performed in place of an attack instead).
|
|
Also, from what I've heard, if you trip someone and they try to stand up, you may not be able to trip them as an AoO. Not sure how that works.The reason for that one is that the AoO is resolved before the action which provoked it. So in the case of someone standing back up the AoO is resolved while they are still on the ground and so can't be tripped (but you could use the AoO to perform a different maneuver which can be performed in place of an attack instead).
Disarm is a favorite if applicable.
Yeap... but without improved trip, they can AOO you on your own AOO!
How do you resolve chained opposing AoO?
Let's say A is leaving B's threatened square thus provoking AoO from B,-B attempts to trip A without Improved Trip as AoO, thus provoking AoO from A,
-A attempts to sunder B without Improved Sunder as AoO, thus provoking AoO from B,
-B attempts to disarm A without Improved Disarm as AoO, thus provoking AoO from A,
-etc, etc,......
since AoO occur before the triggering action (in this case the provoking combat maneuver as AoO), the triggering AoO technically hasn't happen yet, so in the example above, when B AoO disarm A, A hasn't use their AoO yet which means A still have an AoO available in reaction to B's disarm.
First time PFS GM here:
A question for regular Society GM: how do you treat a player that vanishes (most probably for real life reasons) from the game, do you give the character a Chronicle at the end of the game or not?
That depends; how far along did the player make it before deserting?
Not much more than the intro; but it's a regular player and GM, so I'm more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
But if the rules are stricter, I have to obey them too.
Yeap... but without improved trip, they can AOO you on your own AOO!How do you resolve chained opposing AoO?
Let's say A is leaving B's threatened square thus provoking AoO from B,
-B attempts to trip A without Improved Trip as AoO, thus provoking AoO from A,
-A attempts to sunder B without Improved Sunder as AoO, thus provoking AoO from B,
-B attempts to disarm A without Improved Disarm as AoO, thus provoking AoO from A,
-etc, etc,......
since AoO occur before the triggering action (in this case the provoking combat maneuver as AoO), the triggering AoO technically hasn't happen yet, so in the example above, when B AoO disarm A, A hasn't use their AoO yet which means A still have an AoO available in reaction to B's disarm.
It’s not quite accurate to say the action provoking an AoO hasn’t happened till after the AoO, but rather the triggering action is in the process of happening when the AoO resolves.
An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue…
PFS probably needs a more clear handling of it since they want more consistent rulings, but at the very least it informs how to describe the events once resolved, each step of the way is started and in motion when it gets interrupted by the counterblow.
For example, narrating your example would look something like,
Move, trip, sunder, disarm
“Adam steps backwards but Bill hooks their foot in an obvious attempt to trip but Adam saw it coming and counters by striking at Bill’s weapon, and Bill steps up to grab Adam’s weapon while Adam’s focus is on the weapon…”
First time PFS GM here:
A question for regular Society GM: how do you treat a player that vanishes (most probably for real life reasons) from the game, do you give the character a Chronicle at the end of the game or not?
This is a lot more complicated than just a percentage or anything; please reach out to either me or Ebonfist with the details by PM and we will help you.
|
Hello everyone! Paizo Organized Play is seeking feedback on our programs as we look to Starfinder Second Edition and beyond. Whether you’ve been playing Organized Play for years, have just joined the Society, or haven’t yet played a game with us, we’re looking for your thoughts on our programs.
The survey below should only take a few minutes to complete, and the data will be invaluable to the future of our programs. We are explicitly looking for feedback from both OP participants and non-participants, so please encourage your communities to complete it!
**Survey link: https://paizo.me/3NKzGrV
PM send Redelia!
Hey folks, as you can see from the feeding frenzies that occur whenever someone posts recruitment for a new game, we are in need of GMs to grow our lodge.
If you're reading this and you already GM, thank you! Your work helps keep this place running.
If you're reading this and you either haven't or don't GM, we'd like to know why and see if we can address any barriers. Please take the survey below and let us know what we can do to help.
**Survey link: https://forms.gle/X83uccMG4o2KJUVNA