Christopher Fannin's page

IIRC, pathfinder2 explicitly defines attack rolls as checks, but it's ever so easy to believe something is true and ever so difficult to find an answer one way or another and some days, I couldn't google my way out of a paper bag.

Basically, if a player gets encumbered, do they suffer a -5 to melee attack rolls? While encumbered, you reduce each of your movement speeds by 10 feet, reduce your maximum Dexterity bonus to AC to +2, and take a –5 penalty to Strength- and Dexterity-based checks.

A check is a d20 roll that may or may not be modified by another value. The most common types of checks are ability checks, initiative checks, and skill checks.

I'm not sure. Plain english reading says an attack roll should be a check, but in my experience attack rolls are -way- more common than skill or ability checks and isn't called out the same way initiative checks are.

I don't know. What random piece of FAQ or rule clarification have I failed to locate?

Help? :)

As a GM, I feel like the Mechanic's ability Remote Hack isn't really taken into account well enough in the modules, or is written to be too open-ended.

I'm curious what level of agency and what forms of restriction other GMs and players have experienced with Remote Hack. I've considered requiring LOS or LOE to a target, or restricting by intervening material thickness, but I don't want the ability to feel useless either.

As a side question, do later AP's do a better job of suggesting responses to potentially troublesome class abilities? Seriously, as written, there's nothing stopping a drone mechanic from climbing on top of most buildings and walking around the top remote hacking every computer and robot with impunity. It's like playing Watch Dogs, but better.

I had a thought today while deliriously bicycling in the heat. There are a number of times when, in my experience, groups avoid tropes because the skill system doesn't encourage avenues of play that are..less direct.

Concrete example, a party with a fighter or cleric or other armored character will often (IME) avoid stealth-based resolutions to problems because there's realistically no chance that all of the characters can pull it off and common logic is that splitting a 4-man party is tantamount to suicide.

But what if your skilled character could make a single check for the entire group? What would be the ramifications in play of something like (and this is probably the simplest workable version) a rogue making a stealth check at -2 for each additional untrained person and letting that count as the group's roll?

That's basically what happens now when the bard steps up and charms the pants off the princess, or the wizard teleports the party across the world. Heck, it's basically what happens when the rogue climbs a wall and drops a knotted rope down so that Anemic Wizard can climb or be pulled up safely.

You could do the same thing for perception rolls too, to cut down on the 'Jack, roll perception'...and then having every pounce over to where Jack was standing so they get a chance to roll too. One check for the group. Less metagaming maybe :)

Does it sound workable?

I have never grown out of my childlike desire to be able to do all of the things that my favorite fictional characters can do. Fortunately for me, I get the privilege of GM'ing for a group of fantastic players on occasion :)

In that vein, I'm contemplating pieces and parts of a new campaign run and I have been considering throwing someone with Coinshot-like powers into the mix throughout the game, using at will telekinesis as the basis for the power and granting use of TK during immediate actions in order to mimic how I envision the power.

Has anyone else experimented with something like this? I'd rather not reinvent the wheel if someone has had good (or bad) luck with it.

I've never played a wizard high enough level to actually try to use the spell, but I'm curious. Could you set up a contingent dispel magic (or greater dispel magic) to act as a counterspell?

Say 'if someone other than me casts Time Stop nearby, counterspell it with Greater Dispel Magic'.

I assume you could, but for some reason I'm having trouble getting it past my WTF-o-meter. Probably because counterspelling isn't something I ever actually see done.

Just a curiosity question, I suppose. In another thread, ciretose made the following comment:

And if you spend 1000 gp on consumables and I spend 100, in real game I will have 900 more gold than you later.

That got me wondering....is that 1) actually expected as a design element, and 2) how people actually play it?

Looking at the WBL guidelines in the gamemastery section of the pfsrd (too many subordinate clauses..ugh), we can see that if a character is created at any given level with balanced gear, they should have approximately 25%/25%/25%/15%/10% weapons/armor/othermagic/expendables/coins.

So the question becomes, in my mind, does that apply as you level. If the sentiment above is correct, then the assumption would be than as you level, players who make heavy use of potions or wands eventually fall behind the rest of the party, right?

I think that it's a moderately unreasonable stance from the standpoint of excess bookkeeping. Not only does everyone have to know how much money they have, they have to know how much they've spent, and on what, if an accounting ever comes due. (IME, accountings come due most often due to character death, swap, or player changeover...events that happen with saddening regularity)

Just curious about community opinion on the subject.

Trying out my new Flowing Monk for the first time tonight, we ran across a question of timing and interaction.

How do immediate actions interact with the actions that trigger them?

Case in question, an enemy 5' stepped up to me and proceeded to full attack. In response, I executed my Redirection attack (an immediate action to reposition/trip the opponent).

Assuming I succeed, what is the correct order of events? It was decided that I had to take the incoming strike that triggered redirection, then the opponent would have to make any followup attacks with whatever penalties the action left him with (in this case, prone and sickened for a -6 to hit), but is that correct?