Durngrun Stonebreaker's page

Sometimes a poster takes a break because their house burned down and they need time to put their life back together. Stuff happens.

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.

Among the demon hordes, a succubus can often rise to incredible heights of power through her manipulations and sensual charms, and many a demonic war has raged due to the subtle machinations of such creatures. A succubus is formed from the souls of particularly lustful and rapacious evil mortals.

HeHateMe wrote:

Fine, fine, I'll bow out. I will never be able to understand why people seem to want to unfairly punish a fellow player because he or she wants to play a paladin though. I just don't get where all that hate for these players comes from. I never see these threads pop up advocating punishment for wizards or rangers, it's always paladin players that get the hate.

How is it hate?

For instance, in my scenerio thw GM did not go out of his way to punish the Oath vs undead paladin. He already created the story and then had the player go and make characters and a guy made a logical choice of an oath vs undead.

The simple fact of the matter is that many of the oaths are horridly written and require you to play a racist and can EASILY put you into lose/lose situatuons. Is a good aligned undead a contrived circumstances? Aftwr all, it does not have the [evil] subtype....

Did the DM tell the player that his world had good aligned undead (or good aligned fiends as in the op)?

Since when does a paladin need extra healing?

Just think how dangerous he'll be in three more levels when his summons become permanent.

Summoner's Charm (Su): Whenever you cast a conjuration (summoning) spell, increase the duration by a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your wizard level (minimum 1). This increase is not doubled by Extend Spell. At 20th level, you can change the duration of all summon monster spells to permanent. You can have no more than one summon monster spell made permanent in this way at one time. If you designate another summon monster spell as permanent, the previous spell immediately ends.

Why would the rules team know you if you're a Secret Wizard?

Nobody is expecting anything for free.

Nobody is expecting anything to be bundled.

Why is this an issue?

Seriously, what the hell?

Somebody just really wants to dispel misconceptions, that don't exist?

I don't think it is an issue. I think people were just talking about Herolab.

You keep cutting off Special Attacks.

Quote:

Special Attacks

This section discusses all of the various standard maneuvers you can perform during combat other than normal attacks, casting spells, or using other class abilities. Some of these special attacks can be made as part of another action (such as an attack) or as an attack of opportunity.

Best Magic Item for a thrown weapons build, especially if your DM lets you modify specific magic items.

Just checking in, has anyone won the thread?

"I don't believe in global warming because too many scientists believe in global warming."

Hmm... Haven't seen that one before.

You keep cutting off Special Attacks.

Special Attacks

This section discusses all of the various standard maneuvers you can perform during combat other than normal attacks, casting spells, or using other class abilities. Some of these special attacks can be made as part of another action (such as an attack) or as an attack of opportunity.

Gamerskum wrote:

So when do we stop roleplaying in order to get the mission done?

When an alternate interpretation of your character leads to better table harmony than another.

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?

You know, I could swear I've seen threads like this before...

Well, killing is amoral, too.

Just don't mention gun control. Those guys get touch attacks, man.

You can have my touch attack when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

I'm bewildered at the thought that losing the right to discriminate against a group of people is somehow "oppression."

Yea to all. It's non-lethal, who cares.

Yuugasa wrote:

How can same sex marriage being legal be used as a club against religious groups?

I was going to talk improvised weapons, but the Constitution isn't really that heavy.

Scrollmaster

No don't take them early in the day. That's when I go to avoid people in general.

I keep trying to take my oldest kid to the movies and she always wants to play outside. I just don't understand this younger generation.

How would this FAQ affect the Beastmorph alchemist?

The complaints I've seen about Sleep being overpowered tended to focus more on coup de grace then prone or disarm.

Cavall wrote:

Class is class.

We're talking about class features. Are your class skills considered class features? If so, are your BAB, saving throws progression, and hit die size also considered class features? I think not. They are considered part of the class package, but aren't features of the class. Do monsters with skill ranks and class skills count those as class features? If so, do they count as having a character class because they have a class feature?

But, no, class skills are not class features. They are inherent to all classes and creatures and as such are not a "feature". The class skills selected are part of the class package, but not considered "class features".

So if two archetypes changed a class's hit die size or BAB, would they be allowed to stack?

Salt shot

I have to wonder if Aelryinth really believes in his position or if this is just his way of attacking the armor spikes FAQ.

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.

According to the recent 900+ post discussion on the matter, Acrobatics is used for "obstacle avoidance".

You're not actually jumping, you're more like teleporting, and continuing your movement as you were before.

So, whether you're clearing a 100ft pit or walking up to a wall, the DC to climb it would be the same.

Eschew real life comparisons.

Don't be that guy, Nefreet. You're better than that.

If Captain America surviving a blast from Ultron ruined the movie for you, then you were trying to not like it.

I've never heard the term min-max outside of the internet.

bookrat wrote:

I think it's more that people believe that choosing a low score from point buy is "intentional" min-maxing, whereas getting unlucky with a low stat and just placing it just dealing with an unlucky roll. After all, you started with a 10 and didn't have to choose to lower it.

Now, I'm not saying this makes sense, it's just the feeling I get from those who argue for your question.

That is what I am getting too. I guess I will have to agree to disagree with them on this one.

How does it not make sense? Can you truly not see the difference in getting a benefit and not getting a benefit?

thejeff wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Olympians A and B have a jumping contest.

Olympian A gets a 20 on their Acrobatics check, and lands 4 squares away.

Olympian B has a 15ft pit dug, and gets a 15 on their Acrobatics check to jump over it, landing in the same square as Olympian A.

Does that make any sense to anyone?

No, of course not. Ergo, Olympian B's Acrobatics check fails to jump over the pit.

Plenty of people refuted it. No one refuted it to your satisfaction.

Distance moved is not equal to distance jumped.

A covers 20' with his jump leaving the ground slightly before the pit and landing well beyond it but still in the next square. He moved a total of 20'.

B covers 15' with his jump, leaving the ground at the edge of the pit and landing just past the lip of the pit, stepping into the next square. He also moved a total of 20'.

(Both of them also needed 10' of space to get a running start, so they used a total of 30' of movement.)

You're changing the variables.

A and B have the same starting point. Leave "edges", "centers" and "middles" out of this.

A's check gets them 4 squares away.
B's check gets them 4 squares away, but only when a pit is placed there.

How does that make sense?

If you're leaving "edges, centers, and middles" out of the answer. Why not leave out "squares?"

With point buy you receive a benefit for intentionally lowering an ability you don't need. There is a difference between lowering your Cha to 7 in order to max out your Int and putting a rolled 7 into Cha because that 7 has to go somewhere.

For the record, I didn't click FAQ because this is dumb.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Yes, people keep saying I'm adding 5ft, and that their method is "simple and straightforward".

Likewise I keep saying they're subtracting 5ft and that my method is "simple and straightforward".

10 foot pit 10 foot DC. The equation literally can't get easier than an equals sign.

15 foot distance 15 foot DC. The equation literally can't get easier than an equals sign.

My position is supported by the number of squares you are moving your figurine on the grid.

Which isn't something you think about while moving. If you're looking at the map, you see two lines X distance apart and a plunging valley deep below. The game will describe an X foot wide pit. People think of it as an X foot wide pit. Even you're describing it as an x foot wide pit , not an obstacle which is required to be traversed with x +5 feet.

I'm a very visual person (though I know everyone says that).

I don't see it as "x + 5 feet".

I see it as "x squares moved".

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?

It really grinds my gears that the Stupid, Stupid Threads thread didn't take off.

This is the dumbest thread I've read since the fighter bonus feats thread. Please carry on.

When the post that compared me to Hitler (for saying humans don't have tails in Pathfinder) was allowed to stand, I quit flagging any posts.

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.

If you can meet the Dex requirement, look at Break Guard. With the Foehammer's 7th level ability you can disarm with your hammer, then bash with your shield, bull rush with Shield Slam, and finally, trip at the end of the bull rush.

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

You know, I always hear people ask, "how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

My question, If they can't chuck wood, why do we call them a woodchuck!?

Edited to be funnier.

The word "woodchuck" is a misinterpretation of their Native American name "wuchak", which roughly translates as "the digger".

Not funny at all, but true.

I'm still gonna keep using that joke.

If Spiked Shields don't stack with Bashing Shields, then how am I supposed to store them!?
Because as it is they are making a mess all over the forums.

You know, I always hear people ask, "how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

My question, If they can't chuck wood, why do we call them a woodchuck!?

Edited to be funnier.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

A kobold with a greatsword and CR 1/4 might have the same CR, but he's more dangerous. That's the whole point. Why does half of this thread think the default kobold needs to be more dangerous? Why? I really don't get this, and I feel like it's the main barrier here. Show me there's a reason for you wanting kobolds to not die. Far too keen on what and how, but not so hot on why!

Whoops. Been listening to too much JCS lately. Just kidding there's no such thing.

No, you're right of course Cleavy McKoboldpants. Some creatures were just born to die - that's the meta reason that justifies poor weapon choice and I'm ok with that for mooks. I think all of this stems from the fact that, without changing anything in the standard kobold build other than shortbows I made a gauntlet of an area in a dungeon. The kobolds were secondary; their placement in Full Cover was primary. Suddenly my players freaked saying "HOW COULD KOBOLDS HAVE SHORTBOWS YOURE THE DEVIL!!!" when I started questioning "why NOT?"

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.)

A kobold with a greatsword and CR 1/4 might have the same CR, but he's more dangerous. That's the whole point. Why does half of this thread think the default kobold needs to be more dangerous? Why? I really don't get this, and I feel like it's the main barrier here. Show me there's a reason for you wanting kobolds to not die. Far too keen on what and how, but not so hot on why!

Whoops. Been listening to too much JCS lately. Just kidding there's no such thing.

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.
Or is the idea of all kobolds not being identical just too far fetched?

Not if the slaves are trying to kill you.

The average kobold is certainly not a farmer.

Creatures of deep, dark places, kobolds are masters of tunneling, mining, and setting traps.

As creatures of deep caverns and shadowed forests, kobolds have difficulty with light, and even a torch is uncomfortably bright to their eyes. Hence, though they are not naturally nocturnal, they rarely venture to the surface during the day.

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Did I not link the text you quoted?

One of us is clearly not understanding the other.

I find that to be 90% of forum posts.

And half the fun!

Did I not link the text you quoted?

One of us is clearly not understanding the other.