Demons exist for one reason—to destroy. Where their more lawful counterparts, the devils of Hell, seek to twist mortal minds and values to remake and reshape them into reflections of their own evil, demons seek only to maim, ruin, and feed. They recruit mortal life only if such cohorts speed along the eventual destruction of hope and goodness. Death is, in some ways, their enemy—for a mortal who dies can often escape a demon's depredations and flee to his just reward in the afterlife. It is the prolonging of mortal pain and suffering that fuels a demon's lusts and desires, for it is partially from mortal sin and cruelty that these monstrous fiends were born.
Pixie, the Leng Queen wrote:
Did the DM tell the player that his world had good aligned undead (or good aligned fiends as in the op)?
Just think how dangerous he'll be in three more levels when his summons become permanent.
I don't think it is an issue. I think people were just talking about Herolab.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
You keep cutting off Special Attacks.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
So not only is it okay to force a character's action but you feel it within your right to change the player's interpretation of their own character?
So if two archetypes changed a class's hit die size or BAB, would they be allowed to stack?
I've still have yet to see any rule or FAQ that even implies you lose your shield bonus because you made an attack that doesn't involve your shield hand.
Considering you can TWF with your shield and not lose your shield bonus (at the cost of a feat), I don't see how this can be considered overpowered.
Shields don't require a "hand of effort," weapons do.
You lose the AC bonus of a buckler if you use a weapon in that hand because you have used that physical arm. Similar to being unable to use a manufactured weapon and natural weapon with the same arm.
The amount of effort required to use weapons is listed here and in the CRB pg 141. There is no similar language regarding shields that I am aware of.
Don't be that guy, Nefreet. You're better than that.
How does it not make sense? Can you truly not see the difference in getting a benefit and not getting a benefit?
If you're leaving "edges, centers, and middles" out of the answer. Why not leave out "squares?"
Quit thinking about it in terms of squares and you're golden.
Let me ask you this, if one player wants to take an action outside of combat, do you still roll initiative?
Edit: To put it another way, you say the grid is an abstraction, why are you forcing the grid into the question/your answer?
Natural weapons are handled differently than manufactured weapons. When you make a full attack you can use all your natural attacks. Primary natural attacks are made at your highest BAB and gain your full Str bonus to dmg. Secondary natural attacks are made at your highest BAB but with a -5 penalty and only receive half your Str bonus to dmg.
The Alchemist's claws and bite from Feral Mutagen are primary natural attacks.
The Two-weapon fighting feat has no effect on natural attacks.
I'm still gonna keep using that joke.
Mark Hoover wrote:
There have been a couple of in-game reasons as to their weapons choice in this thread, it just whatever you choose to accept.
(Also their stealth bonus is probably more related to sneaking away as opposed to sneaking up on.)
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Oh, KC, you're are my second favorite poster.
Or the kobold in the Beastiary is the average kobold, the one adventurers are most likely to run across, and a DM can change the equipment if they want something different.
The average kobold is certainly not a farmer.
Creatures of deep, dark places, kobolds are masters of tunneling, mining, and setting traps.