Iramine

Grey_Mage's page

**** Pathfinder Society GM. 369 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 27 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 369 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

No idea what the official ruling will be, but my personal ruling is that you need one hand free and probably need to have Healer's Tools somewhere on your person.

Which seems relatively non-restrictive while still throwing at least a wink and a nod to realism.

I agree with the hand free interpretation but less so about the healers kit.

The closest approximation Battle Medicine has to real life is applying a tourniquet. Although even new "high speed low drag" tourniquets require more than 2 seconds to apply and at least one hand to tighten it. (2 hands would be a vast improvement on time but not an absolute requirement but it is impossible to accomplish while someone is swinging a sword no matter how many hands are used.) Some suspension of disbelief is required in either case.

As a former combat medic I can assure you I had tourniquets at the ready but the emphasis is to always use the patient's gear first. People expecting trouble would have strips of clothing on a belt to minimize these item access troubles. Therefore, I don't think a healers kit is necessary for a once a day combat patch job.

I do look forward to clarification in any case though.

Grand Lodge

No. It still has to be in your spell list
Like a wizard you can have unlimited spells (extracts) known that you can use to prepare your daily slots if you have unlimited resources to buy and document them.

This is also covered by the FAQ that states adding a spell to spells known doesn't allow an alternate class lacking that spell from using spell slots to cast it.

Grand Lodge

Can a mage armed only with a dagger threaten and provide flank against an opponent with 10 hardness?

In other words is the ability to flank reliant on actually hurting your opponent or just able to attack them?

RAW interpretation, the latter is correct and the shadow flanks.

The former is not unreasonable especially if a critical hit or coup de grace with the weapon couldn't do 1 point of damage.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A meridian belt might assist you in your efforts. You can wear 2 extra rings and can switch to a different active ring as a Swift action which wouldn't impact your summoning shenanigans.

Grand Lodge

Orfamay Quest wrote:
... or that Comey was lying to avoid embarrassing his boss. That seems to be SOP in the Trump administration, until people wise up that, first, it doesn't actually protect them, and, second, Trump is likely to undercut them for no apparent reason (just to keep everyone off-balance?)

Possibly, but I find it doubtful. This is the guy that reopened the Clinton email investigation days before election based on new information. During testimonies about this decision (paraphrasing here) Comey stated "I follow the letter of the law". There are already statutes that dictate if an investigation is being coerced, it must be reported to the DoJ "immediately". The Trump-Comey meeting is months old and if we are to believe this memo is a smoking gun Comey will essentially plead guilty to several crimes.

I don't think he's worried about how his new boss looks. I think is worried about walking a fine line between keeping secrets and revealing them now he is being subpoenaed.

Grand Lodge

MMCJawa wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:


Can I reverse this question a moment? Student debt is skyrocketing, yet colleges are paying professors to do research rather than teach day in and day out. Why shouldn't we socialize higher education as well?

As an actual college professor I find this hilarious. Schools provide trivial funding, if that, for research. Schools only provide a variably sized start up package so that the professor can get his lab up and running, a tiny bit of money to attend conferences, and usually a space for an office and lab. Professors are expected to actively pursue NSF and NIH grants to fund there own research, and if they can't...pay for it out of pocket. On top of that, many high profile positions actually REQUIRE grant money for the professor to survive, only paying out half salary with the other half being expected to come from grants.

For many professors, we spent a large chunk of our time endlessly applying for grants, which is a huge laborious process with tons of bureacratic red tape to get through not to mention the huge time sink that is writing the grant itself. Often this ends up as wasted effort, since continual cuts to grant-funding agencies against rising costs of research and competition means that 80% of grants get rejected. To give you a sense, between various job tasks, I regulary put in 12+ hours a day 7 days a week, only a small proportion of which is actually reflected in my salary.

Once/if we get a grant, as much as half of our grant money goes to University overhead. The whole lump sum in general goes straight to the school, which often makes money out of the interest.

And high profile research can often be a major selling point in public media, which can get more students interested in attending your school, and get more alumni excited enough to donate. I know my University loved the free media attention by the new fossil dolphin I published on last year. And a strong research program allows you to involve undergrads into your work, so they get hands on...

Thank you for the response as I did learn things from it. As a Professor I'm sure you are familiar with asking a leading question to stir conversation like throwing a little gasoline on the fire.

In 2009 Democrats held both houses and the Presidency, They could have passed ANYTHING including student loan reform or socializing secondary education. My contention this was never done since universities are bastions of liberal philosophies. The implication of socializing something is the government gets to dictate worth and value rather than the free market. If its okay to tell doctors how much they can charge or be reimbursed, why not do the same to professors and college administrators? Yes it's murky waters since state universities receive significant funding and constraints from the respective state already.

In hindsight, this is sufficiently off topic enough I will refrain from making or accepting further comments off topic from the main discussion, but I am not cutting and running. If this topic or the opportunity to "school me" interests you feel free to open a new topic.

Grand Lodge

On the original topic

On 8 May Comey testified that the investigation was not pressured in any way.

HIRONO: So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?
COMEY: In theory yes.
HIRONO: Has it happened?
COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.

CNN Transcript

Since the memo about the Trump-Comey meeting was in January there seems to be difficulty in making the jump that Trump ordered the investigation closed and serves as further evidence that an informal (and legal) request was more likely.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:


Thank you for the question. I don't.

However the reason why may not be what you expect. I believe the above report is flawed. Blue states/areas are naturally urban and more densely populated. The high cost of living in these areas also necessitate the need for higher minimum wages which will skew the average household income in favor of a blue area despite radically increased pricing on all items. I would be interested in similar studies based on cost of living overall.

I left a blue state for a red state and enjoy a higher standard of living despite a reduction in wealth overall.

Conservatism by nature implies saving for a rainy day. Take care of yourself and family because if something really hits the fan the government will be to busy saving itself. This trend overall reduces activity of a dollar overall, because taxation is not on wealth its on financial activity. Stashing parts of my wealth on things that's are stored away reduces activity similar to stashing money in my mattress.
Urban centers will always generate more activity.

I do think on a national level conservatism is better if we could balance our budget. At nearly 20T in debt we can't save our way out of it, but we cant ignore it either. Soon the interest alone will dwarf any other discretional spending. Reducing expense and government 10% across the board would still take about 80 years to pay our debt without inflation or economy growth. Remember when Democrats said Republicans were draconian and wanted people to die? Well that's when they tried to "SLASH" less than .5% of the budget. The sides need to have a honest conversation without name calling or ideologues.

So how is it, then, that the government is going to *balance the budget* if they are talking about a reduction in the tax rates that produce the most income for the government while increasing the rates for the production of the least effective income re-distribution for the government?

How is it then, that the government is going...

Basic Economics

This.

Also, by placing more money into the hands of the people, they spend it on things which increases the tax base as activity is taxed, not things, allowing it to gain value more than it sitting idle in the Federal bank account.

Edit: Good night. Sleep. Work. Game. Sleep. Work. Gotta Pathfinder game tomorrow night so stay classy in my absence. Offline awhile so keeps please wait in line to dog pile =)

Grand Lodge

Irontruth wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:


Health care reform... I was not impacted by the previous bill, nor this bill. Understand that the larger argument that we haven't had is "What responsibility does a society have to keep a member healthy / alive?" Consider that the majority of healthcare spending is used in the final years of life. Also consider if you had to bear the responsibility personally for all your bills many would chose to die earlier rather than burden their family with debts, or at the least save their accumulated wealth to pass on to the next generation rather than spend it on themselves.

I understand this will be misconstrued as conservatives want people to die, but that's not the point. The point is peoples attitude regarding spending change drastically if the collective pay for it vice individually.

If this theory were true, you could point to a country with guaranteed health care where costs increased more than they have here, where health care is not guaranteed.

Can you point to a country that guarantees health care and spends more than the US (say... as a percentage of GDP)?

No because the question is a non-starter. No other country's medical care is rising at our current rate so the rest of the question is inevitably false. Socialized medicine doesn't work (well), it has been tried but innovation drops down and equipment ages without updates as indicated in both the UK and Canada. The first couple of years is fine but there isn't money to replace gear and wait lines are horrible.

A large chunk of our increasing costs are derived from innovation and overhead of dealing with insurance agencies as a barrier to care.

Can I reverse this question a moment? Student debt is skyrocketing, yet colleges are paying professors to do research rather than teach day in and day out. Why shouldn't we socialize higher education as well?

Grand Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:


Health care reform... I was not impacted by the previous bill, nor this bill. Understand that the larger argument that we haven't had is "What responsibility does a society have to keep a member healthy / alive?" Consider that the majority of healthcare spending is used in the final years of life. Also consider if you had to bear the responsibility personally for all your bills many would chose to die earlier rather than burden their family with debts, or at the least save their accumulated wealth to pass on to the next generation rather than spend it on themselves.

I understand this will be misconstrued as conservatives want people to die, but that's not the point. The point is peoples attitude regarding spending change drastically if the collective pay for it vice individually.

Let's be real here. In that situation the vast majority would not "choose to die earlier rather than burden their family with debts, or at the least save their accumulated wealth", they would die because they run out of money.

We've had this argument. We had it back in the 60s with Medicare & Medicaid, we've had it in several healthcare debates since then. We had it when we passed the ACA. It's over. It's done. Despite the holdouts. Even the GOP is trying to pretend Trumpcare will be better rather than promising to get the government out of healthcare.

No debate happened with the ACA. Even Then-House Majority Leader Pelosi said, "We have to pass the bill, to know what's in the bill".

The ACA is terrible for this country, it was negotiated in secret. Relied on lies to get it to balance out by the CBO cost estimate, and passed without debate. This was done to finish it before Kennedy's seat was replaced by the Republican was seated a few days later.

However, they were right. Once given, it wouldn't be taken away. It's just we gotta fix this garbage legislation now. It was written with the express intention of growing government and placing more control into politicians hands as the starting point, not lowering costs.

If you want to cheapen medicine, make more doctors, put tort reform into place, allow more competition in the market place.

Grand Lodge

Rednal wrote:

I feel like the word "alternative" is not especially well-received at the moment, given our fun new phrase "alternative facts".

But more seriously, Grey_Mage, you said above that you want people to "get to work" so we can have less debt. That's fair enough - I think most citizens can agree that not being in debt is better than the alternative. That said, average household income trends much higher in liberal states than conservative states.

Similarly, blue states tend to contribute more in federal taxes than they take in federal benefits, while red states tend to take more in federal benefits than they pay in federal taxes. With all respect, why do you (apparently) feel that Conservatism is better for the economy than Liberalism?

Thank you for the question. I don't.

However the reason why may not be what you expect. I believe the above report is flawed. Blue states/areas are naturally urban and more densely populated. The high cost of living in these areas also necessitate the need for higher minimum wages which will skew the average household income in favor of a blue area despite radically increased pricing on all items. I would be interested in similar studies based on cost of living overall.

I left a blue state for a red state and enjoy a higher standard of living despite a reduction in wealth overall.

Conservatism by nature implies saving for a rainy day. Take care of yourself and family because if something really hits the fan the government will be to busy saving itself. This trend overall reduces activity of a dollar overall, because taxation is not on wealth its on financial activity. Stashing parts of my wealth on things that's are stored away reduces activity similar to stashing money in my mattress.
Urban centers will always generate more activity.

I do think on a national level conservatism is better if we could balance our budget. At nearly 20T in debt we can't save our way out of it, but we cant ignore it either. Soon the interest alone will dwarf any other discretional spending. Reducing expense and government 10% across the board would still take about 80 years to pay our debt without inflation or economy growth. Remember when Democrats said Republicans were draconian and wanted people to die? Well that's when they tried to "SLASH" less than .5% of the budget. The sides need to have a honest conversation without name calling or ideologues.

Grand Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:


GDP projections for current quarter are estimated at 4%. Obama achieved 3% in 1 quarter throughout his 8 years.

Unemployment rate is 4.7% and dropping.

Stop. That wasn't the question.

First off, you made a lot of errors, had them corrected, and then offered no response. All you're doing it moving on to new errors.
Every single time someone does this, what they end up doing is being corrected so many times they just bounce back to the previous falsehoods as if nothing had ever happened.

The question is what has trump DONE and how has it had that effect. What has trump DONE to get unemployment down? That it's gone down after he showed up isn't that big of a surprise since it was on the way down anyway. Anyone can walk to the helm of a ship that's already been steered, hold the wheel and say "look! we're closer!"

Unemployment has been trending down

Quote:
Illegal immigration border crossing is down between 75 and 85%. This is not a racial issue so much as people come for the opportunity this country creates and pays for via law enforcement, anti-cronyism laws, medical benefits and so forth.

Assuming that people that used to go back and forth aren't just staying here because of the increased security.

Quote:
The numbers are coming in. Have faith, but you wont see them presented in the mainstream media,

You cannot blame the media for reporting reality because you don't like reality.

Quote:
just like you never saw how Obama administration specifically recalculated the reported unemployment rate to artificially inflate his numbers.

The "unemployment rate" has always been a bit of polite fiction and vastly different than the people unemployed. This is not news

Quote:
Specifically, what did Trump do? He set the agenda.

Vacuous execuspeak

Quote:
Executive orders
come on if executive orders...

Actually, I went to sleep, then to work. Patience grasshopper. The night is young and the bees have been busy since I was here last.

I respond to the polite busy bees first.

Grand Lodge

captain yesterday wrote:

I'm curious how a conservative feels about Trump now.

Will you be effected by the health care reform.

Are you okay with him wanting to imprison reporters.

How do you feel about him casually sharing classified information with other nations.

Are you worried that he possibly tried to obstruct justice.

Forget global warming, forget all the other stuff, how do you personally feel about those issues.

Health care reform... I was not impacted by the previous bill, nor this bill. Understand that the larger argument that we haven't had is "What responsibility does a society have to keep a member healthy / alive?" Consider that the majority of healthcare spending is used in the final years of life. Also consider if you had to bear the responsibility personally for all your bills many would chose to die earlier rather than burden their family with debts, or at the least save their accumulated wealth to pass on to the next generation rather than spend it on themselves.

I understand this will be misconstrued as conservatives want people to die, but that's not the point. The point is peoples attitude regarding spending change drastically if the collective pay for it vice individually.

Imprisoning reporters? Only if they break the law. The Obama administration spied on reporters to identify their sources on at least 2 occasions.

Sharing information? Fine. It's his call. Our allies have seen us as unreliable under the Obama years and our adversaries have grown bolder as a result. Diplomacy takes on many forms. Since the cited article cited only anonymous sources and their were only 6 people in the room the newspaper proliferated the data much more than Trump.

Obstructing justice? No, but I see the concern.

Trump asking Comey if he is ready to give up an investigation is not illegal.

Trump asking him to prioritize his time elsewhere is not illegal.

Trump ordering him to give it up or face consequences is illegal. Note however that Comey BY LAW is required to report interference immediately to the DoJ. The memo was 3 months old... so I'm thinking one of my 1st two scenarios is what happened.

Grand Lodge

Hitdice wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:

Different or alternative... Does it matter? If we only engage in conversation with those who are of the same political mindset as us it is effectively self-imposed intellectual segregation.

If you only know your side of an argument you don't even know that.

We value diversity in everything but thought. I welcome you to my world anytime. Please wipe off your shoes before entry (i.e be respectful).

As a guest in your world, can ask what Trump has done to make you believe that he is in any way going to lessen the debts passed on to our children? That's a laudable goal, but I can't think of one thing he's done to bring it about.

GDP projections for current quarter are estimated at 4%. Obama achieved 3% in 1 quarter throughout his 8 years.

Unemployment rate is 4.7% and dropping.

Illegal immigration border crossing is down between 75 and 85%. This is not a racial issue so much as people come for the opportunity this country creates and pays for via law enforcement, anti-cronyism laws, medical benefits and so forth.

The numbers are coming in. Have faith, but you wont see them presented in the mainstream media, just like you never saw how Obama administration specifically recalculated the reported unemployment rate to artificially inflate his numbers.

Specifically, what did Trump do? He set the agenda. Executive orders and ongoing ACA legislation.

Grand Lodge

I think it would be more endearing if he helped them in a small but unavoidable bind they find themselves in. That way they feel obligated to return the favor rather than an NPC who keeps needing things from them.

Can't give much advice without any setting information.

He can:
-get them into a ball (I think via backdoor methods is better than calling in favors to get tickets) i.e. risking his neck to sneak them in.

-get them out of trouble with the law / guild / ruler by accepting responsibility for them and their actions.

Grand Lodge

Different or alternative... Does it matter? If we only engage in conversation with those who are of the same political mindset as us it is effectively self-imposed intellectual segregation.

If you only know your side of an argument you don't even know that.

We value diversity in everything but thought. I welcome you to my world anytime. Please wipe off your shoes before entry (i.e be respectful).

Grand Lodge

Consider an alternative...

Trump doesn't want the country distracted by non-important issues.

If you say he's doing it for his own good, consider this:

This is the stated reason he doesn't want Hillary pursued. (The investigation is complete, the case is laid out, the statute of limitations has not expired). It can be in front of a grand jury next week, but he doesn't need to see a 70+ year woman in an orange jumpsuit because it would only serve as a distraction.

America has problems bigger than Flynn, bigger than Hillary. We need to get to work so our children won't be saddled with our debts. No matter how we would like to cheer like a Roman coliseum mob when the other side gets bloodied, its a only a distraction from the major problems facing us so the comparision is apt.

Grand Lodge

Racism is bad. (especially when it is used by the Justice Department to justify not pursuing investigations into law breakers of a minority persuasion because of bad optics.)

Misogyny is bad. Too bad Trump had the first successful presidential campaign headed by a woman. Too bad he pays women that work for him based on worth. (Hillary paid female staff workers less than their male counterparts, but hey, locker room talk is much more important than actual real life actions.

Religious bigotry is bad. However, the travel bans do not reference religion in any way outside his campaign statements which are not actually admissible as they aren't attached to the executive order in any way as stated by the judge in the case but he allowed it anyway.

Denial of scientific reality is bad... where to start? shrug... other forums exist on global warming...err cooling, err weather unpredictability.

Staggering incompetence is bad. Which is why Comey was fired after the worst investigation into crimes committed by Hillary and her staff were found, then granted immunity to all the wrong doers, followed by destroying of the evidence BY THE FBI is beyond staggering. Comey should have been fired. Kudos for Trump employing him as long as he did (or maybe it was because of the quasi-investigation into Russian ties that prevented Trump from firing him).

Grand Lodge

Squeakmaan wrote:
Sadly yes, there is no coherent policy on the Right, there is nothing but hating liberals. Anything they are for must be fought, and anything they are against must be supported at all costs.

Spoiler Alert! I'm a conservative.

I bear no hatred for liberals because I used to be one. I casually engage them in conversation when and where I can. If two people have two different answers to something they should compare notes and learn from the other to find the source of divergence.

I firmly believe the healthy relationship I have with my spouse isn't based on our agreeing 90% of the time, it's about how we tolerate our disagreements by respecting the others point of view. Unfortunately, due to the polarization in our country any disagreement is bad and the other side evil or stupid and the other side must be mocked or silenced.

I honestly think there is nothing to see here. Its a non-issue. Drop it or keep talking about it for the next two weeks in "outrage".

-Trump asking him do something is not illegal (perhaps unethical).
-Comey refusing is not illegal, but he works at the discretion of his bosses. I have more respect for him refusing (if true) than anytime in the past after the politicization of the Justice Department under the Obama administration.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
avr wrote:
I can't see the party abandoning him until and unless there are electoral consequences. Which means not until the 2018 midterm elections at best. Polls I think won't be enough to change their minds.

I agree. Consider his base though... the polls didn't underestimate them, they ignored them or stifled them into silence or lying because arguing wasn't worth the inevitable response of being called racist, privileged, ignorant, or deplorable.

There is to much outrage among the left. No one cares because they hear leftist hatred every single day. It simply ceases to have any impact on the average Trump supporter. My point being if there ever is something legitimate no one will care because Democrats have been calling for his impeachment since the day he assumed office.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The readied action prevails. Provoking an AOO is a separate issue from the readied action.

Yes the trigger action may be a Swift action, but the readied action still occurs before it by RAW and the initiative is modified accordingly.

Swift actions may take very little time but you had someone waiting for exactly that triggering event.

Grand Lodge

Yes. Provided the maneuver can be performed in lieu of an attack. Some, such as a grapple, are made as a standard action and not usable as an AOO.

Grand Lodge

PFS is alive and well. We run games in 3 different areas of the city. If you are willing to travel a little you have opportunities to play 4 games a week.

As far as the city in general i'll send you a PM with my contact info.

Grand Lodge

To simplfy:

Would skill focus Perform (Oratory) apply to the roll?

Would skill focus Diplomacy apply to the roll?

Bear in mind the above answers when you consider..
If expanded inspiration applied to Perform checks would it be allowed

Grand Lodge

Your roll is modified by the applicable skill at the time of the check.

So you are making a perform check in leui of a diplomacy check. Only skills and magic items that affect perform would apply.

Grand Lodge

Seems a reasonable way to screw with players, but understand its only a dc 20 perception to realize an invisible creature is nearby (not pinpointing the square, just realizing trickery is afoot).

Even if the PCs lack see invisibilty there are situations that the devil wouldnt be able to continue his verbal assault undetected.

Grand Lodge

Jeff Morse wrote:

no you cant. you can find the reason by going to http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/magic.html

and scrolling down to transmutation magic.
simple answer is cant combine two polymorphic effects.

Although reduce person is a transmutation effect, it is not a polymorph effect.

Grand Lodge

Lord Lupus the Grey wrote:

Wild shape to large water elemental, then reduce person to medium again, then wear your armor and shield.

Is that correct?

Looks legit, but not well optimized since:

-you have to remove your gear prior to wild shape
-the reduce person lasts 1 min per level.
-it takes time to put armor back on

Seems alot of work for marginal gains since both spells confer size bonues so like-ability scores wont stack.

Grand Lodge

The panache pool isnt much of a limitation past lvl 5 when they all get improved critical. At this point thier damageis really coming on line as well so they will be dropping foes pretty handily.

Also allowing them to dump all thier panache at once means they will expect a 15 min workday if they are unlucky nd manage not to get a killing blow or crit in a combat.

Grand Lodge

Disclaimer: this is from memory so...

Generally you can't re-skin to something else with different stats (like calling a dog a wolf).

Also, anyone who looks at it must know what it is. Your fox can be albino or a white artic fox, but no one thinks its a white wolf even if it gets enlarged.

Lastly, there can be no mechanical change like a improved steath score in snow conditions or such in my fox example.

Basically, flavor only. You have an ape, and you can call him an orangutang (if an orangutang doesnt have a dedicated bestiary entry).

Grand Lodge

He targets the square (AC 5).

It has cover so +4. If he misses use splash rules and apply damage accordingly. Even if he hits an occupied square the occupant only takes splash.

I would avoid using the trajectory distance as the rules arent well scripted for 3 dimensions. A 50' long throw would likely use a 45 degree angle so it would normally go up 25'... This leads to issues if the ceiling is only 20'...

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Technically the magus was acting with evil intent and would have pinged as positive on the Detect Evil radar... So...

Serously, no. Evil is always selfish, either directly or indirectly. I seeno selfish actions here.

Were the Palidans behavior lawful? Less clear depending on the scenario but lethal damage in and of itself is not evil.

Grand Lodge

Pit spells dont last long enough to invoke suffocation as there is sufficient air in a 10x10x(10 to 50 feet) to last awhile.

Grand Lodge

I am of the opinion a save is allowed. Let heroes do heroic things like resisting hold person enough they make it to an adjacent square in extremis. Hold person allows a person to attempt to end it every round so they are effectively fighting the paralysis. This means small movements may still happen as they are held. Since there is nothing that dictates what part of the 5' square you are held in, a simple lean forward and a move of a foot could allow movement into an adjacent square. Guess the rogue was lucky that his positioning allowed this tiny victory... Understand this is descriptive text to visualize how a reflex save could be made in this scenario. On the other hand if you wish to stick with rules specific there is nothing that disallows a save. The rules are the rules, its up to to the imagination of the gm to state how it occurs, like how I can hit the touch ac of a bat swarm flying in open air with an alchemist flask and have it break open. This also is allowed and forces the gm into heroic story telling mode.

That aside, the end result is likely the same as they will still be frozen on the lip of the pit and have to re-save at the end of thier round anyway.

Yep. Mages still win but not automatically.

Grand Lodge

If we are going to treat painful stare equivilent to sneak attack because the damage is both precision damage...

-an effect like blur will inhibit painful stare.

-invisibility will prevent it even though mesmerists have a built in mechanic to maintain hypnotic stare against targets they can't actually see.

Grand Lodge

They are spontaneous spell casters with the same language as sorcs.

Its a full round action (standard and move) to add meta magic is how I have seen it handled.

Grand Lodge

A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD. Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD. A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to its CMD.

So, it depends on the type of bonus each grants to AC to determine if it applies to cmd.

Anything that increases attack rolls relevant to the combat maneuver generally applies.

Grand Lodge

Adamantine bypasses hardness, not obstacles. The arrows will damage the wall, bypassing hardness, but will still be blocked by it.

Grand Lodge

Note: blindness requires fort save, not will save. If he's using glitterdust to blind then will (and hypnotic stare helps) then he's okay but the bad guy gets to resave every round.

Spell casting, even psychic spell casting is visible and should notify others in the area something is foul. Charm Person doesn't work if there are multiple guards and the skinny guy casts a spell then one of them changes behavior. The other guard will react accordingly.

As it's a world of your creation you have to decide how common is magic knowledge among the populace and the countermeasures that need to be in place. Charm person is a 1st level spell so guards should at a minimum have ranks in sense motive and spell craft to ID spells due to training set up by the court wizard.

Small magic items can help as well. An amulet that glows in the presence to find altering magics for example would be a wise investment for anyone suspecting mental infiltration.

Generally mesmerists work well as 1 opponent. Bold stares can mitigate some immune opponents 50% of the time, but multiple opponents with immune types like golem, swarm , or undead is really the bane of a mesmerist.

Grand Lodge

Yes. Your example is fine. Masterwork means high quality of a level suitable to receive enchantments and is often purchased separately from enchanting especially at low levels.

The biggest restrictions that affect people in PFS in this regard...

-a non masterwork weapon can't becomes masterwork later on (barring a masterwork transformation spell). This primarily affects heirloom weapons in a characters backstory.

-a weapon can't change materials. Your masterwork long sword can't become mithril or adamantine. (It's a new sword rather than an upgrade on the old).

Grand Lodge

There are posts that explain dev team intent to keep the ruleset manageable by keeping similar things similar. The provided example is all improved combat feats provide +2 to CMB and prevent an AOOs.

I doubt the difference between a positive modifier versus a bonus is significant enough to warrant all players and GMs to remember "critical confirmations use the same bonuses as the original attack, except for Investigators."

So Mr Charisma, I agree with you. As for your second question, I treat the bonus as a variable one and force the confirmation roll to reroll the inspiration die, but wouldn't argue if a GM ruled it is static one for both.

Eliandra, since the damage from an inspired weapon is from a special weapon quality, it is not multiplied on a critical hit.

"Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit."

Grand Lodge

Azten wrote:

Which doesn't matter if you're invisible because you gather power isn't something that breaks the spell.

Or if your target is flat-footed.

Or if any of the other ways to get sneak attack applies.

Invisibility masks the kineticist, not the nimbus and gather power. For the most part this is an insignificant difference but situations exist that may affect the OP in how they interact like in a surprise round. You couldn't GP a full round and them unleash from invisible without the enemy knowing something was up.

The once a round standard action kinetic blast attack seems to work well with stealth sniping rules. Ranged sneak attacks are usually difficult to pull off and GP only makes it worse as expect GM frowning if you GP before sneak attacking in many situations.

As I said previously, it works but bear some things in mind if you use this combo.

Grand Lodge

Kinetic blast would qualify for sneak attack but expect to not be able to gather power before your ranged strike as its noisy and highly visible.

Grand Lodge

The error was for an evergreen scenario? Don't give him credit. Player seems to agree with this.

Nothing else matters since its repeatable on other characters.

If it was for a normal scenario, I'd issue a chronicle with 0 xp, fame, and gold just to annotate consumables used and lock out the scenario in the future.

Grand Lodge

The range of the spell changes from self to touch.

Simply:
A touch range does not equivocate to a ranged touch attack. That's something else entirely.

Grand Lodge

1 seems unlikely and would create hurt feelings for a broke ability a mouser gave up opportune Parry and riposte to get.

3 is how I initially interpreted it, but over time I have come to the belief option 2 is the correct one as mobs will just provoke with a move rather than 5' step or withdraw basically granting no benefit if the GM metagames that all mobs know what underfoot assault is and leaving provokes.

FAQ worthy IMHO

Grand Lodge

I'm having trouble understanding the other interpretation.

A merciful weapon is still a lethal weapon that converts all damage +1d6 to non lethal. Sneak attack should work fine. There is no penalty for using it as the welder still attacks with it the same way as any other weapon. The typical non lethal penalty is from using the weapon in an improvised manner (flat of the blade or less important body attacks). For this reason sneak attack (hitting someone where it hurts more) typically doesn't work with non lethal strikes unless the weapon was explicit for that purpose (like a sap).

The Merciful enchantment converts it to non lethal so the weapon is welded the same way as lethally. Factor in the fact any sneak attack damage is converted to the same type as the original damage (in this case, non lethal) and sneak attacking with a merciful weapon makes perfect sense.

Grand Lodge

Option 2.

You appear immediately upon an attack or upon completion of the duration (3 mins if memory serves).

Standard action to activate.

Grand Lodge

1 No. The handedness FAQ in TWF and armor spikes means you already used your off hand with your bastard sword.

2. Yes. The SLWS is a swift action which can be used between attacks.

3. Yes.

On a side note. Weapon cords are now move action to recover.

Grand Lodge

If I fiat a change to the clerics spell list it either means the deity is directly involved in the outcome of a certain encounter that will happen (used sparingly).

The deity is displeased in a way requiring less than an atonement. For instance the party passes a village that requests healing assistance and the healing domain cleric saves spells for the party (just in case). I've found changing the spell allotment to all healing spells just before arrival in a town striken by war is an excellent way to inform the cleric not to abandon his or her clinical and spreading the faith responsibilities.

It communicates to the cleric to tend certain duties without direct communication such as a dream. The cleric must interpret the meaning rather than being spoon fed by the GM.

1 to 50 of 369 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>