Deer's page

Well, i must agree on them not being completely identical, after thinking it through.

BUT, i would still call confounding blades a mistake from paizo, by making i an advanced talen, and by making it in general ;)

Well, either way it is not the same.

Think a little more about it, it almost is.

Besides, if slow reactions also apply to ranged attacks, it just makes it better, despite being a normal talent.

Hi, i just want to point a little mistake made, when you made the Ultimate Combat book:

It is regarding a rogue talent from the Core Book and an advanced talent from UC:

Core, normal talent:
Slow Reactions* (Ex): Opponents damaged by the rogue's sneak attack can't make attacks of opportunity for 1 round.

UC, advanced talent:
Confounding Blades* (Ex): When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon that deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn.

is it me, or is the game effect of the two completely the same?

Our little group:

1: A student shopclerk (our GM)

2: A student nurse (Girlfriend to #1)

3: A student surveyor (Me)

4: an unemployed due to health issues

5: An independent tailor

6: A student carpenter (boyfriend of #5)

Hi guys and gals, i just wanted to have a place where we can share all the ideas that would immediately turn our otherwise well behaved good and neutral characters over to the dark side.

So post your ideas, and share your evil creativity that gives our GM's the tics.

I personally thought about going Cruella de Vil on my last druid. In the need of a dragonskin armour, in a world where evil dragons were rare at best, i considered to turn to the more easily caught and killed pseudodragons and fariedragons.

Yes, they are cute, intelligent and good (not to mention so small that some dozens are needed), but the real deal is bloody dangerous to a low lvl character.

What sick ideas have you cooked up?

Hmm, i guess your right :)

Sqwonk wrote:

The Bestiary does not have any rules for Bugbears as PCs. Are there some listed elsewhere? Anyone have a house rule?

Thanks

You can use the rules in the back of Bestiary for adding class levels to a monster. Without looking, I believe that a Bugbear without class levels is equivalent to CR 2, the same as a 3rd level character. The Bugbear with 1 PC class level and appropriate ability scores should start play roughly balanced alongside level 4 characters.

Acutally you are not quite right, HappyDaze, you take the CR as startlv, so it would be a CR 2 bugbear with two pc lvls.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monstersAsPCs.html

Some times i wonder if people use the PRD at all. It more or less contains the whole Bestiary, APG and Core, and is free to use. Heck the Monster as PC even has its own article in the index

Nope, but the Rogue has skillpoints like noone else. 8 + int modifier, so after a few lvls you usually have enough for quite a few fluffskills.

But forget it, you simply cannot have higher ranks than your total HD. Its quite basic ;)

Yes, that is correct. but it does not mean that the complete score can only be one.
If Stealth is a class skill, you get as following:
1 rank + dex modifier (lets say +2) + 3 = 6
If you have feats that gives bonus, add these as well.

On the other hand, unless you play rogue there should be enough skill you need, for you distribute the skill-points properly

Hmm, okay, I concur.
I would still ask the good folk of Paizo to rewrite the feat, for it is, as i said, flawed.

I can see that i did not read the details on the rideby close enough, regarding the charge and attack action.

On the other hand, i agree that a grapped creature of course will try to break free, but wouldn't it require lightning reflexes or something to react AS IT IS BEEING GRAPPED?
Sorry for the capitals, but i haven't figured underline out.
Also a grappled foe would still be close to the bird, and would get his normal attack (unless pinned).

In Law there is a term called "precedent", which means that if some rules are applied in a certain way, they shall then be applied the same way in similar cases.

My argument is still that flyby and rideby are so similar, if used to attack, that the same conditions for countering them should be applied.

Hmm, is does make sense, what you say. Im more argumenting for that it Should be mentioned. We are talking about a monsterfeat so poorly written that its general description goes against the detailed benefit description. Leaving the flyby attack open to AoO makes it almost useless to monsters without magic or ranged attacks.

Specific, im playing a Druid with a Roc companion.
There is no reason that the Roc should make a flyby where he can only make one bite attack, if he still gets bashed by everything nearby, when he could go into normal close combat and gain full attack with bite and two talons.

I would like to hear an official ruling from paizo, and maybe that they would rewrite the feat. Its horrible flawed as it is.

I agree with you, as the rules are written, flyby does provoke AoO.
But won't you at least agree that it doesn't make much sense, when compared to rideby?

I must say, that i do not see your point about the Charge. When charging the AC is lowered by 2, thus making the charging character easier to hit.

What difference does it make if a giant eagle is airborne, dives, claws it's target (with only one talon, as we are talking about a standard action), and continues away with the same speed, compare to a knight riding by swinging his sword a the target, and continues galloping away?

What makes the knight AND his mount harder to hit?

They are both "approach, attack, withdraw" combinations done in one movement. Therefore the same rules should be applied to them, IMO.

- Deer

reefwood wrote:

Quote:

Benefit: When flying, the creature can take a move action and another standard action at any point during the move. The creature cannot take a second move action during a round when it makes a flyby attack.

Does using the Flyby Attack feat provoke an attack of opportunity?

Can any standard action be used with this feat or does it have to be an attack (as the name implies)?

I haven't godt experience with this, but by RAW I'd say yes to both.

1) Compare it to Spring Attack, which directly states that there is no AoO against the target.

2) It allows a standard action as written, so that could be anything.

I disagree, about the AoO. If we compare to the rideby attack, which is essentially the same, apart from it is done from a horseback instead. The rideby attack does NOT provoke an AoO. So under the same circumstances it makes most sense that Flyby attack doesn't provoke an AoO eighter.

From PRD:

Ride-By Attack (Combat)
While mounted and charging, you can move, strike at a foe, and then continue moving.

Prerequisites: Ride 1 rank, Mounted Combat.

Benefit: When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.