AZhobbit's page

When you sit down and not one person, even the rouge, has a knowledge skill......any knowledge skill!!!! Then you decide just how self reliant is your character.

The main issue for this is which perception determines flanking. The person attacking or being attacked. The person attacking an opponent doesn't know the other person flanking is there unless the have the ability to see invisible. Thus how do they know they are flanking? This needs to be FAQ'd since nothing in the rules for flanking address this "specific" issue.

Umm anyone else notice the fella who started this thread hasn't responded to it in a while.....let it go.

On a funny note I GM'd a table where the CN rouge coupe de grad the NPC the Neutral Good Cleric was supposed to speak with to complete her faction mission. The Cleric secretly deemed the Rouge as Evil since he did this without provocation and really had no reason for this other than he was.... whatever. So the cleric decided to never heal the rouge and even used her selective channel to exclude him, once even healing an enemy. The player who was the rouge died in the scenario and did not have enough gold or prestige to raise himself. He said this was equivelent to PVP and thus illegal, and I asked him if he had knowledge religeon, he said no to which I said, then you have no idea what channeling is and thus too bad. I don't think he is coming back.

While I am not terribly fond of this thread, since the idea of changing ones alignment to gain benefit from classes on opposite spectrums is really power gaming(just make a new charecter). Most of the arguements here are easily policed by other players. For example I ran a table where the Chelaxian bard, who was offically neutrel, seemed to be the one who advocated the killing of everyone even goblin children. He would make lecherous and disparedging remarks to the female Sanerae Cleric and I could tell she was becoming a bit offended(in charecter only). Her character asked the bard to stop, he replied "it's the devil in me, I can't control him"(I had too admit that was really a great response). However, in character he went down from a critical sword strike. And while he layed there bleeding out the Cleric decided not to heal him and deal with the undead that were attacking the party, even though she probably could have channeled and stabalized him, and as a result he died. This infuriated the player of the bard and he accused her of not knowing her "Role" at the table. She ignored him and as a GM I explained his actions were rather evil in nature and the LAWFUL GOOD cleric made the choice to save the party rather than him. I also went on to say she was playing her character, and no one has a "Role" at the table. I then explained that if he wanted to play evil characters masked by another alignement, expect the same treatment, and his beratement of another player is unacceptable. He hasn't returned.

‎#1 - The Grand Lodge, finally the Society gets it's own faction!

Umm why is this a faction since we all PATHFINDERS and the Grand Lodge is our headquarters? This seems like a redundant concept. I thought factions were missions related to National Affiliation.

wayyyy too much time on your hands