Gnoll Coward's page

I agree, and RAI that's probably the case.
Unfortunately, no ability actually refers to "wielding a weapon in two hands". Near as i can tell, the only place the phrase appears is in the sentence attempting to define what it means. Abilities always use "one-handed weapon" or "two-handed weapon" when referring to requirements.
If the intent is to define a "two-handed weapon" as one that is being wielded with two hands, the text should probably be revised for the sake of consistency and clarity.

Not quite a ruling or clarification, but I'd like armor and weapons to be more unified, not every weapon or suit of armor needs its own entry, a messer can be a longsword, a cutlass can be a scimitar, and lamellar can be scale mail.

This.

None.

Much as I like the idea of Snake Style thematically, I would recommend against it - you would have a total of 5 abilities that require an immediate action. Of the three listed I would probably go with Crane Style: it keeps the whole elusive/defensive vibe, and Crane Riposte has some synergy with Unbalancing Encounter.

Ghost Salt can be replaced by a backup bow with ghost touch.

Ghost touch is a melee weapon enchantment.

I thought it was Core class pregens only, other than the special pregen only scenarios.

Correct.

Ultimate Errata.

It used to link to an old thread I had started in which I had asked about aasimar/outsider proficiencies, to which James responded with "aasimar don't get proficiencies as outsiders." <-- paraphrased from memory

this?

Even so, your starting languages must be chosen from Draconic, Dwarven, Elven, Giant, Goblin, and Orc.

Or from the Modern Human Languages list.

It's late, but I'll see if I can dig up any core rulebook examples of cold iron weaponry later.

CRB 15-11 lists Cold iron longsword, masterwork as 330 gp.

Gnoll Coward wrote:

Nicos wrote:

Monk: maybe a sohei with a dip into unarmed fighter for the style feat and the proficiency in the temple sword.

Monks are proficient with the temple sword.

My bad ^^

Mine actually, I think you were correct. Sohei gets all martial and simple weapons. I assume this replaces the standard monk weapon proficiencies. Temple sword is exotic.

One of my characters is considering a change of faction. He's currently second level, with 4 prestige and 6 fame.

Has your character played any scenarios/modules as 2nd level?

WTF?!?!?

WTF? WTF? WTF?!?

...
That was my favorite MMO!!!
...

DAMN!!! DAMN!!! DAMN!!!

That SUCKS!!!

Exactly.

Sad to see it go. I've been playing on and off since beta, and IMO CoH had the best dev team and community in the industry.
For that very reason, despite having lifetime subs to both Champions and DCUO, I choose to play CoH instead.
Until the doors close, see you on Virtue.
@Alienist

As long as I have my chronicle sheets showing I played first steps 1-3 my character is legal to play at level 2, correct?

Correct.

Ready? No.

Prepared? No.
Excited? Yes.

This. My last Gen Con was 31 years ago, I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume it's changed a bit.

You're a kobold. And kobolds are awesome.

This.

Making decisions - good ones and bad ones - which count and can't be easily reversed - this is what defines character.

Overcoming adversaries is what let's you feel achievement.

We should not forget that we play PCs - player characters

I don't say that playing a PB - a player build - can't be fun as well or in certain circumstances can be even more fun.

But it is still called a player character and I hope this aspec of the game won't change.

+1

There's an old-, old-, old-school British King Arthur pnp game I sadly can't remember the name of, but I remember it being really creatively inspiring... anyone know it?

Assuming you didn't mean a British publisher, and that 1985 counts as old-old-old-school. I'd guess Pendragon is what you are referring to.

I've peeked at the ARG a bit now, and I have to wonder: why are the darkvision-granting options for elves and half-elves banned? Is it a power concern? Canon/setting violation? Just curious.

Somewhat related error on the Additional Resources page: Elves have all racial subtypes listed as legal, yet Arctic and Dusk elf both contain darkvision which is prohibited.

What if I were to tell you that it may be a movie reference?!

I'd wonder where they got the time machine from.

The rules state that you cant take two archetypes that substitute the same ability. What if two archetypes substite one same ability at, say lvl10 and you only want to follow the class to lvl 5 anyways?

The rule still applies.

A wizard or sorcerer really only needs one stat to do her thing, and the rest is gravy. Put the 15 in your casting stat and play a race that gets a bonus to it and you'll do fine - you'd do better with better stats, but not in a way that makes you unable to pull your weight in the party. Just be sure to stand behind someone.

edit: Witch or summoner too. I'm going to go against the people calling synthesist here, though - even if you compensate for poor stats by wearing your eidolon, you still won't qualify for combat feats to really be a solid frontliner.

This.

Simply put the negatives wherever you think best fits concept. Decent primary stat, reasonable amount of skills/languages, and the penalties won't hurt you much in or out of combat. Seems playable to me but YMMV.

As far as what I would do? 17 Int. Negatives in Str/Cha (old and cantankerous). Positive in Con (tough old goat). Get a shaking cane as a focus and tell the damn orcs to get off my lawn...with fire.

Bright side, being a squishy with a bad con score means you probably won't be playing it very long

You would think that wouldn't you?

I dont remember that. I thought the options came out with unearthed arcana. Funny how one remembers the way we did it as "correct".

I still much prefer it, but it doesn't seem feasible for the later editions or PF.

I don't have much of a preference either way really. Having said that, I can see how being forced to play a 5 Con Illusionist because it's all you qualify for might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Gnoll Coward wrote:

mem0ri wrote:

The most accurate answer for that is "During raw D&D and 1st Edition AD&D when we also measured weight in 'coins' and were lucky to make it to 7th level". Seriously ... level 9 was when you basically got a kingdom and retired.

Kind of my point I guess. The implication always seems to be that it was RAW in 1st Edition, which it wasn't.

Isn't it? That's how we always played AD&D. What was the default stat generation method?

Oddly enough, there wasn't one until the DMG came out listing methods I-IV.

The most accurate answer for that is "During raw D&D and 1st Edition AD&D when we also measured weight in 'coins' and were lucky to make it to 7th level". Seriously ... level 9 was when you basically got a kingdom and retired.

Kind of my point I guess. The implication always seems to be that it was RAW in 1st Edition, which it wasn't.

Katapesh would work depending on your definition of "accepting".

I always get confused by these threads. When exactly were "the old days" where everyone rolled 3d6 iron man backwards uphill both ways in the snow with no saving throw?

Also, is greensting +2 or +4 my UM book says +2 online paizo site says +4

It was changed to +4 in the errata to UM.

Oh, then I'd definitely go with the blows up in your face on occasion version.

If you actually want it to be structurally unsound for flavor reasons, I don't see any issue with offsetting the cost with fragility.

Personally, I can't see dwarves building anything that wasn't designed to last. As a result, I'd probably go the opposite direction - assume it was constructed using the same alchemically-strengthened stone crafting techniques dwarves used for stoneplate, and increase the cost, weight and durability accordingly.

I think we need to know more of the hippogriff's backstory.