Valeros

Espy Kismet's page

743 posts. Alias of Ævux.


RSS

1 to 50 of 743 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

I really would like some talk here too. At least something that clears up the wording as it doesn't seem to recognize it was even melee attacks in the first place. Kinda a quick slapdash of rules and moved on forgetting to come back and fix it.

Grand Lodge

No PFS DM would allow even a /kobold/ to take tail terror. ^^

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:

I have only ever asked you to show me where it says racial heritage grants you a tail. As part of that I asked you to show me where appearance is an effect of race. Those are both affirmative statements. I am asking you to prove in the affirmative.

I'm not asking you to prove my position, in asking you to prove you own.

Show me were it is an attribute of the race.

I don't need to. The game is based on permissive rules. ie. the rules tell you what you may do. In some cases, for clarity, they may specify something in particular that you may not do. That however doesn't change the base assumption of the ruleset. If you wish to do something you must show that you are permitted to do so.

You want to grow a tail. Great. Show me the feat that says "You grow a tail." Failing that, demonstrate that "Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to race," means "You grow a tail."

You have been unable to do so.

Ah great, then you agree that Racial heritage can cause effects in your appearance.

You have yet to show me that your appearance is an attribute of your race.

Again though, we are at a standstill. Race effects appearance.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:

I have only ever asked you to show me where it says racial heritage grants you a tail. As part of that I asked you to show me where appearance is an effect of race. Those are both affirmative statements. I am asking you to prove in the affirmative.

I'm not asking you to prove my position, in asking you to prove you own.

Show me were it is an attribute of the race.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
When you ask your opponent to prove a negative, you admit your position is indefensible.

Well then, lucky for me, you've asked me several times to prove a negative before I asked you to prove anything.

Not really, I have asked you several times to prove your own affirmative statement that racial heritage grants you the ability to have a tail. You have been unable to do so, and have repeatedly tried to reframe the argument.

I, in fact, cannot be asking you to prove a negative because my default position on this matter is in the negative.

Show me in the rules where is says your physical description is defined by race, and then I'll show you in the rules were Racial heritage defines your appearance.

Cause you've been telling me to show you where it isn't defined by race. A Negative. Which is your default position.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
When you ask your opponent to prove a negative, you admit your position is indefensible.

Well then, lucky for me, you've asked me several times to prove a negative before I asked you to prove anything.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

And show me in the rules were it is not.

We're at a stand still here, unless some dev comes in and says if it is or isn't.

Is appearance an effect of race?

Grand Lodge

Well, thats great for your home rules.

Grand Lodge

Make up your mind!

It either is or is not affected by your races.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Effects of my race do not include appearance.

So then your race has no bearing of your appearance.

Grand Lodge

So your race doesn't affect your appearance?

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:


Ok, now that we agree that there is some limit beyond "choose you appearance" in Step 6 of the character creation guidelines, where do you draw the line?
Well, what races do you count as?
I'm a human and I took the adopted trait, so I also count as an elf for choosing traits.

No you don't.

Quote:
Benefit: As a result, you picked up a race trait from your adoptive parents and society, and may immediately select a race trait from your adoptive parents' race.

Unlike Racial Heritage it does not say you count as the race. Just that you can pick up a race trait from the parent's qualified race.

Grand Lodge

Bizbag wrote:


I don't think it's that simple. Does a human who took Racial Heritage (elf) look like a half-elf? I shouldn't think so.

Well, the human didn't take half-elf heritage.

But he might look something like spock, or perhaps one of those pretty boys in anime? Maybe he has a curly mustache and an sensational lust for baking cookies?

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:


Ok, now that we agree that there is some limit beyond "choose you appearance" in Step 6 of the character creation guidelines, where do you draw the line?

Well, what races do you count as?

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:


I think that some purely cosmetic changes could and should be allowed. I vehemently protest the idea that even when combined with other feats these cosmetics should be permitted to become mechanically relevant.

So basically, as long as a feat doesn't use a cosmetic feature as its (The feat's) benefit, its totally cool. In other words what is a cosmetic feature of a kobold (the tail) is bad for the kobold to take tail terror.

Or is it good, because that cosmetic feature wasn't cosmetic some how?

Could the same also be true for someone like a human taking prehensile hair? Because the hair up until the point of taking prehensile hair was purely cosmetic, but the moment he takes that witch's hex it is no longer just purely cosmetic. But somehow this is okay?

But somehow, taking racial heritage at step 4 of character creation and specifically calling out that you do have a tail at step six, to allow for the use of tail terror during play is bad.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Quote:
And I also don't see the part where your physical appearance is delegated by racial norms.
Just so I understand your position, if I wanted to make a character who's legs came out of where their eyes should be, arms from where their legs should be, a tail from where each of their arms should be, and the tails had their eyes at the end, and my character walked upside down (you know, because their legs are in their head), that would be within both the RAW AND the intent of the rules?

Ah, so we're back on to the "I'll disprove your statement by creating something is insanely absurd and that will prove me right!" fallacy. Otherwise known as an attempt to appeal to ridicule.

In other words, unable to come up with any real arguments on why your physical appearance set at step six cannot reflect the effects of a kobold race, you've started throwing out random things without any real argument behind them.

Because, 'clearly', A character with Kobold Genetics on somehow the same thing as whatever that thing you're trying to push is.

So now that you're also trying to beg the question, Did you or did you not create an explanation of why your character is an abyssal horror? Because unlike a human with kobold heritage, you really don't have a foot to stand on.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:

I'm sorry, I don't see the part where it says taking racial heritage after character creation doesn't affect your appearance.

I also don't see the part where it says choosing racial heritage at character creation allows you to augment your appearance beyond racial norms.

And I also don't see the part where your physical appearance is delegated by racial norms.

Thank you, and Please come again.

Grand Lodge

Quote:

Step 6—Finishing Details: Finally, you need to

determine all of a character’s details, including his
starting hit points(hp), Armor Class(AC), saving throws,
initiative modif ier, and attack values. All of these numbers
are determined by the decisions made in previous steps.
Aside from these, you need to decide on your character’s
name, alignment, and physical appearance. It is best to jot
down a few personality traits as well, to help you play the
character during the game. Additional rules (like age and
alignment) are described in Chapter 7

Step 6 comes after Step 4, which step 4 is where you select your feats.

Thank you, and please come again.

Grand Lodge

Actually, I've been very consistent.

Appearance is an effect created by your race at character creation. Your race affects how your appearance is and will be, barring feats/spells that specifically call you that "YOU HAVE NOW CHANGED."

Racial heritage causes your races to affect your appearance between the two races at character creation. Never higher. The reason you cannot have it higher is because there is nothing in the language that states "YOU HAVE NOW CHANGED"

Likewise this is on par with choosing between male or female or one of the many shades in between. Baring magical intervention you cannot change your gender. However, if you decide to be a male, you are not limited to Arnold Schwarzenegger's body structure, and if you choose female you're not limited to only Angelina Jolie. You might be more Jonny Depp, or Mimi (From the drew carry show.) Or you could be Pat from Saturday Night live. The Dynamic could even be to the point were you look like the hanson brothers (Looking female, despite being male.) or looking like some of those female body builders, who look more male despite being female.

So to reiterate -
Take it at character creation = Affects appearance
Take it after character creation = Does not affect apperance

Grand Lodge

PatientWolf wrote:


That is not true but you have to make that claim because of your twisted interpretation of this text do you have to make that claim. Alchemist abilities, spells and many other things, including feats, make changes to your body long after creation. Just one example would be several of the Ifrit feats that cause your body temperature to be extremely hot or your blood to be boiling.

So since feats can change your bodily features and you claim those very bodily features are an effect and subject to Racial Heritage then that logic compels the conclusion that a character could be going along for years looking just like a normal human and then take Racial Heritage and look 100% like a Kobold right then and there.

I do not have any twisted interpretations of the text. Mearly point out at character creation, your appearance is set. Yes, there are a plethora of ways to alter yourself afterwards, however we're not using those ways are you.

Feats can change your bodily features, this is true. But like gender, you cannot simply just wake up one day after going to bed male and wake up female with no magical reason for it.

Your appearance is created at level one, affected by the races you have at that time. Or perhaps you're trying to say at later levels a male character can just poof into female without the use of magical methods?

Again, quite wrong in this, unfortunate to say.

The fact of the matter is you've created what you looked like at level 1, and baring magical things or feats that specifically call out changes, you cannot alter your appearance any furthermore. Which is why Racial heritage can give you a tail at level 1, but not grow a tail at level 3.

Grand Lodge

PatientWolf wrote:


If your GM wants to house rule that you are allowed that choice then feel free. However, by RAW your appearance due to your race isn't an effect.

So now you're trying to say that my appearance is not affected by my race, though I'd have to say you're quite wrong.

It quite clearly it states in the book what effect choosing human would have on your appearance. It also states quite clearly what effect choosing kobold would have as well. To state that choosing a race doesn't affect your appearance... well goes against everything else you've been arguing about.

And since Racial heritage says you count as both for all effects, we have the appearance of both Kobold and Human. However, since appearance can only be set at character creation, it would mean for Racial heritage to have this sort of effect of giving a human a kobold's tail, the human would have to take it at level one, and have is appearance be affected by both races.

In otherwords, if you started at level 1, and when to level three and /then/ chose to pick up racial heritage. No, your character cannot have a tail, unless you figure out a way to alter your appearance again.

Grand Lodge

PatientWolf wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:


SO lets look at English of the word!

You've got a racial heritage. Which basically means somewhere along the line, your ancestors mated with something not-human.

Now lets ask. Are you or are you not genetically different from other humans?

Again the common definition applies IF THE RAW DOESN'T OTHERWISE DEFINE IT. For Racial Heritage it spells out exactly what they mean. In this instance the developers meant something different than the common usage so they spell it out explicitly. It says explicitly "Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to race." That is it. No physical changes.

So effects related to race? Very well. I choose to have my appearance be affected by my choices of the races.

Grand Lodge

Please contain yourself.

The common definition of having an ancestor often includes the idea that the the child of the ancestory takes on traits of the ancestor is it not?

For example If you have an ancestor with male pattern baldness, there is a high chance that you'll also have such baldness, Correct?

Grand Lodge

So in other words, if its not defied by RAW, then its not RAW, but logical assumption of the English words?

IS this correct?

The reason we're going down this path is because of the constant "ITS NOT RAW ITS NOT RAW!" then when we point out what else is not raw "ITS NOT LOGICAL IN ENGLISH!"

SO lets look at English of the word!

You've got a racial heritage. Which basically means somewhere along the line, your ancestors mated with something not-human.

Now lets ask. Are you or are you not genetically different from other humans?

Grand Lodge

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:

Aye. Two-weapon fighting doesn't grow back arms. But off-hand doesn't exactly mean.. another hand. There are lots of weapons that don't require a second hand, or better yet there are ways around it. Such as locking gauntlet, perhaps putting a blade in your hair, or pelvic thrusting.

A person getting Tail terror, could grow a massive pony tail, and use that to tail whip the enemy. Heck my alchemist grows a tentacle a lot and uses it as a tail most of the time.

Does Tail Terror allow a kobold to grow back a severed tail?
Is there a feat not to be a ginger?
I'm guessing by your flippant response that your answer is "no." Also judging by your response, you realize that answering that question "no" makes the case for spontaneously gaining a new tail quite terrible.
Well considering I'm a supporter for having it at character creation...
...you refuse to answer the RAW of his question?

Rather, I rebut his attempt to lead the question by another such attempt.

However an interesting thought came to me, by RAW, what is a tail? What qualifies as a tail by RAW? IS there any rules written that says "This is a tail, and this is not a tail? is there RAW on what you're character's appearance can be?

Quote:
Most people know what a human looks like; two arms, two legs, a head, and no tail. Most know what a wolf looks like, four legs, fur, long nose, fur, and fangs.

I'd also like to put out that most people know that being genetically different (Having mutant bloodlines) often comes with physical differences as well.

For example, Oh i don't know.. Lizard from spiderman.

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:

Aye. Two-weapon fighting doesn't grow back arms. But off-hand doesn't exactly mean.. another hand. There are lots of weapons that don't require a second hand, or better yet there are ways around it. Such as locking gauntlet, perhaps putting a blade in your hair, or pelvic thrusting.

A person getting Tail terror, could grow a massive pony tail, and use that to tail whip the enemy. Heck my alchemist grows a tentacle a lot and uses it as a tail most of the time.

Does Tail Terror allow a kobold to grow back a severed tail?
Is there a feat not to be a ginger?
I'm guessing by your flippant response that your answer is "no." Also judging by your response, you realize that answering that question "no" makes the case for spontaneously gaining a new tail quite terrible.

Well considering I'm a supporter for having it at character creation...

Grand Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:

Aye. Two-weapon fighting doesn't grow back arms. But off-hand doesn't exactly mean.. another hand. There are lots of weapons that don't require a second hand, or better yet there are ways around it. Such as locking gauntlet, perhaps putting a blade in your hair, or pelvic thrusting.

A person getting Tail terror, could grow a massive pony tail, and use that to tail whip the enemy. Heck my alchemist grows a tentacle a lot and uses it as a tail most of the time.

Does Tail Terror allow a kobold to grow back a severed tail?

Is there a feat not to be a ginger?

Grand Lodge

Quote:
Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff skill check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. If successful, the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

Except the words of Greater feint replace out that part of the feint action. Essentially making it..

Quote:
Feinting is a standard action. To feint, make a Bluff skill check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. If successful, he loses his Dexterity bonus to ac against all of your melee attacks until your next turn, in addition to the next melee attack you make against the target does not allow him to use his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). This attack must be made on or before your next turn.

Basically the wording becomes rather clunky with that interpretation.

Grand Lodge

Aye. Two-weapon fighting doesn't grow back arms. But off-hand doesn't exactly mean.. another hand. There are lots of weapons that don't require a second hand, or better yet there are ways around it. Such as locking gauntlet, perhaps putting a blade in your hair, or pelvic thrusting.

A person getting Tail terror, could grow a massive pony tail, and use that to tail whip the enemy. Heck my alchemist grows a tentacle a lot and uses it as a tail most of the time.

Grand Lodge

Ah, then we're pretty much of aliked mind here. Though, I'd say that humans do have claws.. we just call them finger nails.. or if we cut back the skin, our finger tips. (After all, a human skeleton gains claw attacks)

But overall this is one of the reasons I think Racial heritage really should have been a 1st level feat. You either have the heritage or you don't.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not convincing that tail terror does either. Only that in character creation its possible to have had one. Especially with some screwed up kobold/human genetics going on.

Sure, Racial Heritage doesn't specifically state you grow one. But character creation doesn't specifically state you couldn't have been born with one.

Why does your character have a big tail? Well back in the war my grandfather got really lonely while out on the road fighting against the enemy. When he happened across a brothel. Cat Tas Trophy, was the name of it. He said you should have seen the freaks in there.. And it was a pretty cheap brothel at that even, course with the freaks helping to get your freak on, it was understandable. Anycase, there was this one female kobold.. Kzzphvlip.. Or Kelly as the rest of the girls called her. My grandfather became her favorite. He would visit her every week to get a little reptile action. Somewhere along the line though my mother in all her mutated glory was born.. Who ended up running away with my father from the brothel when they had me. I grew up slightly different from other kids, what with the tail and all, and a mother that looked kinda like a lizardfolk, don't ever get her mad though. I was interested in traps and trickery, preferring not to fight the bullies but to utterly destroy their souls and wills to fight me with my cleverly design traps.

To signify this.. I took Racial heritage: Kobold. Because my grandpa got it on with a kobold.

Grand Lodge

Kazaan wrote:


Anyone with at least a 1st grade education.

Only because they lack the understanding of combining ones genetics with a fantastical creature in a world of witchcraft and sorcery. Not to mention, while in a world were everything is mundane, humans are capable of growing small stubby tails.

Most people with at least a first grade education also know that humans explode if they jump out of a plane at a couple thousand feat and hit the ground with out a parachute.

Also anyone with at least a 1st grade education knows you can't have sex with a lizard.

But if its that the entry doesn't mention humans have a tail in the racial book, might I point out that there is nothing that points out Kitsune have hair? So obviously Kitsune are bared from taking White Haired Witch, Prehensial Hair and using the spell Strangling hair.

Kobold, Tengu, Gippli, The undercommon gnomes, and a few other races are as well.

Unless we want to go with implied. Because well.. Magical tail implies kitsune had one. Even though they were never mentioned to have one earlier.

Grand Lodge

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Regardless of the benefits or drawbacks of the feat ...

Regardless of wether it is broken or overpowered...
Regardless of the silliness or cheese...

Humans don't have tails, you need a tail to make a tail attack, and neither feat grows a tail.

Who says humans don't have tails?

Grand Lodge

Well there is a slight of hand to disarm for an advanced talent.

And I don't really see it being a good talent when paired up with a debuffer rogue. Mostly because you could do the three I mentioned pretty much the same way, without using up your swift action and using your attack instead.. being able to get them off just a little more likely.

Cause as is, you have to roll two times, hitting the enemy both types to get the maneuver off. The first roll is at a -2 penalty. Then after you've done that, you lose your sneak attack damage. Followed by using up your swift. Then you get the second roll.

Compared to just using your first attack where you roll only once.

Maybe.. /maybe/ if your level of SA did something in it. Then perhaps.

I see it better as a debuffer for a fighter. Take one level of Rogue then go fighter the rest of the way. Preferably the Lore master one.

Grand Lodge

Also.. Sunder/Disarm/Trip = All three of these could have been used in place of the melee attack in the first place. So.. like the one thing you're getting I guess with them is a small bit of damage.. provided your now reduced AB hits the enemy.

Grand Lodge

Unless of course you are a caster. Then you familiar can be your assistant

Or a Carnavilist Rogue. They get familiars.

Grand Lodge

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Makarion wrote:

Ever looked at monk capstones? My favourite is the one where a monk gets to die to the extend that people don't even recall his existence. Way to be epic!

Granted, the monk can resurrect people in the process, but still.

Huh? The Monk becomes a Magical creature with DR 10/Chaotic.

The archetypes. Specifically Monk of the healing hand for that one.

Grand Lodge

Bill Dunn wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:


As currently, even if you're stuck on an island and surrounded by bones, you generally can't make bone weapons due to not having a place to buy 1/3 the cost in supplies.
Unless you realize that you've got the 1/3 cost in supplies just lying around. You're just picking the value up off the ground rather than paying cash for it. Is this really a hiccup in the rules? Or is it a hiccup in someone slavishly sticking to the letter of the rules?

Kinda what I mean there. Some Dms are a little slavish to the rules and would be like "You need to spend money to do that."

Course we've also got a guy who is kinda the reverse.. He's played minecraft and stuff so much he thinks we have to go dig holes in the ground and work on digging up the ore to be able to craft.

Grand Lodge

Well, at least it is epic. But I can't remember anyone ever using it.

Grand Lodge

Wow.. Thats just crazy. Never had that with Livign forgotten realms, but I got tired of that stuff when all the monsters went first and we always started in fireball formation.

Grand Lodge

It doesn't even have to give like total instructions, but rather guidelines on how to do these things. Especially making things along the way even when you're in situations where you can't get to civilization. Like stuck on an island.

As currently, even if you're stuck on an island and surrounded by bones, you generally can't make bone weapons due to not having a place to buy 1/3 the cost in supplies.

Grand Lodge

Bleh.. if only there was a way to make up the loss of CMB for a rogue.

Why is a fighter better at combat steal than rogues?

And I really don't get why Paizo keeps giving Rogues penalties to their attack rolls with their talents. It takes all of their sneak attack damage, their swift action for the turn and also gives them a penalty to hit?

Grand Lodge

Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
There are people like this And this( A little disturbing)
Yes, but something tells me she wouldn't be able to take a feat for a horn attack with that.

Well, something also tells me she's a level 1 commoner too. But could have a little teifling in her. Not even they can make gore attacks with their horns until they take another feat.

Grand Lodge

Also, you don't get bonus spells known as a wizard if you're going a PrC every level.

Grand Lodge

Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
"Being part kobold," I guess.
Show us where the Racial Heritage feat makes any mention of a change in physical appearance, or physical traits. It only mentions blood, as in genetics, in my reading. This is not a half-X template nor a human-offshoot race like aasimar, tieflings, fetchlings, or the aboleth-aquatic-human race whose name escapes me; not enough to cause drastic physical alterations like the growing of an entire extra appendage.

Well.. considering that a Ranger can identify you as being part kobold just by sight..

And who's to say how much difference one person could have physically compared to another?

There are people like this And this( A little disturbing)

Grand Lodge

Rynjin wrote:
Given the fact that these threads pop up at a decent rate, and you seem to have given it some thought, maybe "Ultimate Crafting" could be a future book idea? =)

based on what what he's said in other threads, it would need to be a few years before that could come out, even if they have thought of it. To be honest, I was hoping Ultimate Equipment was going to cover some of it.

Seems there is also now dragon crafter feats out there..

Grand Lodge

Marthkus wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
So... why don't we make errata for the crafting rules? Because we don't want to change sometimes-bent-but-not-broken parts of the rules via errata... especially if it's not something that has a significant impact on most campaigns.

Guys, this is pretty much /THREAD

Unless you can convince SKR that crafting is so broken as to be toxic to a large portion of PF games played, he is not budging.

Bit of a shame really. Cause it would be nice to have a whole crafting thing done up. So I could set up quests and the like to go and find stuff like a silver thread of moonlight bathed in the tears of the weeping queen.. Or possibly build a cool mundane long sword with serrated edges and a poison dispensing handle

Grand Lodge

Kobolds have tails mentioned in their description so you know what in the vex you're looking at. Otherwise everything would be "You see a thing, carrying a thing. wearing a thing. What do you do?"

Like TunfiskeMad pointed out, mouths aren't mentioned in human description.

Mostly because this is a basic run down of what you are generally looking at. A Normal human looks like X. It doesn't mention what a human that is part kobold looks like.

If the word Tail in a racial description (Rather than the characters') is important for having Tail Terror, would not having the word Hair be equally important for White Haired Witch, Prehensile hair and Strangling hair?

Did you know that in the description of Ratfolk there is no mention of the word Hair? Same thing with all the races I mentioned before and even something like a Kitsune. I guess those races are barred from using those things on account of their lack of hair.

Grand Lodge

And if he's forcing you to accept it.. Get a page of spell knowledge (Magic Missle) Then its on your spells known as well.

Grand Lodge

It probally came out during the time they were making the APG, before they were like "Oh! We /can/ change proficiencies and skill lists."

1 to 50 of 743 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>