Has'Kar's page

I have an animal companion (3 int) and I'd like to take with his feats improved grapple (nice for a ranged character). This feat requires improved unarmed attack, but this is a wasted feat for an animal, that got natural attacks.

It seems legit to think that he don't need this req, or that he can take the grab ability with a feat.
What do you think about this?

I'd let you sub in Imp. Wep Profic,but that feat is required for a good reason. Just giving an animal companion IUS is kind of op.

Check out the bard spells. . . I'm sure there are some great support things in there.

Dot.

Just recently in a game I'm running, the party ranger took a critical hit from a chupacabra. The result from the Critical Hit Deck was "Bone Masher: Normal Damage and 1d3 Str damage (arm.)" Essentially, it broke his arm or sprained it or something like. The part I'm uncertain of is that it says "Limb useless until healed." Is that until the ability damage is healed or until the hit point damage is healed?

I rule all damage done to the arm.

Ie: if he has 30 damage total, and then takes fifteen to the arm, his arm is useless as squishy bits in a fight till15 is healed.(I apply the first fifteen hitpoints to his arm)

Furthering of the question: Do temporary hitpoints fill this catagory?

Kind of a a furthering of the question:

Could a level x monk stop being a monk, begin being a druid, and still get FoB?

This appeals to my intrests as both a gamer, and a new DM.
I believe it will be a multiple use per sitting type of item for me :)

Thank you very much for this fantastic product.

I don't know of an official one, but I do my own on the fly.
I just add a few quantitiy of gold if I feel the need to, or say, "he doesn't have the spell, and now you've made him feel both bad and unacomplished."

The main problem with doing a rarity system for me is that each world, and each town and city in each world, are all so different. There would need to be multiple tiers for each of those settings.

Of course that's just for me specifically, that's why I do mine on the fly.

I've been wanting to make either a grapple, trip, or critical, truely number of attacks, based barbarian.

I'm giving this one obligatory bump before I let it die.

I've been thinking of cutting the barbarian right out and just going alchemist 12, swapping internal alchemist for beastmorph to take advantage of natural attacks and pounce. Can a straight alchemist make an effective meleer?

Yes, I've got a level five Vice. going pretty HAM at my table now. The enlarge person for minutes at a time really gives him a good way to do damage.

I just throw xp at my players for doing good things.
If they rp-d well, destroyed a dungon(litteraly), or were just generally awesome, they will probably get more experience.

Other than that, I go by the book for Cr ratings of monsters, taking the Cr of the encounter, and subtracting the Cr of the group gives you a closer to true rating of how challenging something is for everyone.

It's had me heading in the right directing as far as xp goes for my boys in my first game so far.

So let's say they kill the alchamist before he gelatinous cubes. . . They find an oddly heavy cloudy potion and one of them decides to go ahead and drink it.

What happens when he quaffs the gelationous cube?
I'm thinking it would pour out over him, leading to a suprise round for the cube, and then he would come in on the alc. Turn because of the summoned creature charateristic.

This is why I clearly defined terms, in reality there is too many conflicts, and way to many threads on alignment opinions. Lieing and Killing are at the very least dishonorable, which is in oposition to what is defined for Lawful Neutral in the Core. A disregard for life is allowed in Lawful Evil, which is why I offered that as a possible change that would allow the Monk to retain his class.

You could offer up the lawful Unaligned alignment. I've known a lot of players that love that one. It more or less fits in with my own feelings.

However, the three major generallities between intellectual socities are, "don't steal, don't lie, and don't kill." I don't know if his character would have a problem with stealing. You can ask, "do you adheare to any sort of personal code." In character, either she'll say, "yes. It is BLAH!" or no. At which point you change her alignment.

I usually tell my (more expierenced) players not to write anything in the alignment spot, just to be the character.

It sounds like your player likes to take money out of the bank during monopoly. When I catch that happening I tell them to either replace it with an extra 20 percent of their entire pile, or quit playing. It really ruins the game for everyone.
If someone said, "jacob, you need this shield." I'd be like, "Give it to the rogue, I want that wand, it's pretty."

Hey guise,

I would really love to be able to have the amazing, weightless PDFs for all these great, I classify the core book as 'large sized', books.

My only problem is that I LOVE funneling money into my local store. It makes me feel good, and helps my local economy!

So my question is, through buying the book could I get some magicial code that not just anyone could read(ie a bar code) to use to scan to get a link to a pdf?

Secondly, as I am all for paying for products, Is there any way Paizo could sell download codes or something towards the PDFs? I'm thinking along the lines of putting all the PDFs into one lump purchase for the stores, and then seperating them out accordingly.

By seperating them out I mean make a core set, a monster set, an ultimate set, and a game mastery set. If great books like The Inner Sea World Guide keep coming out we will need one for 'area sets' also.

I feel as though this covers the bases of the game, and would give most players the PDFs they would need in the most convienent way possible.

Besides, paperless IS the new paper!

Thank you for reading my idea.
Jacob.

Do you get an attack of opportunity with a natural or improvised weapon? I thought you did not.

And if you do not have improved unarmed strike, do you provoke an attack of opportunity for doing an attack of opportunity?

You can totally provoke AoO through doing an AoO.

For instance, there are three combatants standing in a L shape. One of the combatants on the end drinks a potion. The one in the middle knows he can only win by knocking him prone, and so he uses his AoO as a trip attack. This (if you don't have the trip tier feats) provokes an AoO from both other combatants. Say the first combatant, Mr Potion drinker, decides to attempt a disarm with his AoO. This will possibly provoke an additional AoO from the combatant who is tripping. IF he has combat reflexes.

In this above situation being familar with grapple, and multiple characters in grapple, would probably be a good thing.

Ravennus wrote:

If my GM allowed it, I'd love for him to use an actual length of chain instead of a hemp or silk rope. The equipment trick feat says you can use "rope-like items" with a GM's discretion, and a chain is essentially a metal rope right?

Foot-for-foot, a chain is a lot heavier and more difficult to wield/swing than a rope is; while the rest of this sounds feasible, I'd be disinclined to allow a chain in this case. Maybe if it was a mithril chain. Or possibly if it was houseruled to become a two-hand weapon without the usual two-hand benefits, but still.

The dm in me is saying to give a minus 2 per five feet of heavy chain, and per ten of light chain to hit.

A rope, to me, slices through anything like a hot knife through a large block of steel. You could totally tie a knot in the end of it and grab the bludgenoning damage type.
Maybe some niffty mwk/plus one bonus could get you into the slashing type, but inserting a sword into the end of a rope would probably not be a good safety feature.

Just getting a spike in-fused rope is good enough to gain piercing to me.

*semi-twohanded weapon: twf feat gets rid of the penalty for wielding one handed*

I would like to see a book of the lore of Golarion.
That would be way cool. I love lore.

I say if it really affects anything, just have the coup-ed character not get hit.
Or apply some homebrew trait on him/her to make them never helpless.

I ususally just throw a motif into my scheduled game.
"All the children are going from door to door...." type stuff.

What's your favorite way to get that first, "you're in a town," game out of the way?

In our group, players expect to die. We know things happen to characters, and diving isn't safe. We mainly expect to die because we always seem to be really stong, and a little too smart, characters, and if the combat is "hard" by most standards it's a cake walk for us.

That said I REALLY want to try the "Players roll all dice option" and play another game using playing cards instead of d20.

There is a really good system based off of cards and d20 fusion set in the old west I know of. Skills are done by d20, while commbat is card based. It's called Deadlands, it is absolutly fantastic. My group and I didn't really ever use any physical combat area.

I don't understand the, "players roll the dice," thing. Functionally I see how it could work. I would get mad though, as rolling is about 10 percent of the fun for me lol.

I'll roll randomm effects(weather, how many people are in town, are there animals around you, etc...) right in front of the player, but won't tell them what I'm doing.

Some things, such as a player making a disguise check, which is needed to be rolled in secret by the GM so the player doesn't know how good his or her disguise is, need to be rolled away from the table. I keep an empty chair next to me for that though :)

I would use CHA myself.

I think STR would be more applicable. All zombies do is walk, moan, eat brains, and moan.

I would love to see a few good swarm minis.

I believe you can drop said wepon as a swift action. (I'm away from my books, so don't quote me on that.)

Which is important for whatever that one monk ki-pool bonus this is actually called.

anyone got some general or specific guidlines for handling "inventors"?

This is something I would encourage, but to what extent? I have a player with a gnome alchemist. He asked about making "inventions", I told him, sounds like a "craft: engineering" skill. He came up with an idea to adhere an extract and a mutagen together with a "button" to open both lids and drink them together, effectivly reducing his "buff" time to 1 round instead of 2 (i.e. strength mutagen and enlarge person).

Seems to me this would be viable. He has no problem with allocating skill ranks, using "time" units to create the item, accepting whatever DC I come up with, even drafting a "schematic" which would use materials available found in the pathfinder world. As I understand it, an 8th lvl alchemist can take the "combine extracts" discovery and get the effects of 2 extracts at once. Should I tell him to wait till 8th lvl and "allow" 2 extracts to equal 1 extract AND a mutagen, or reward the "inventiveness"?

Does anyone see this as "broken"? Would you "allow" this? Any similar scenarios?

Inventing is awesome, I've seen a whole lot of great inventions around my tables. Sometimes the player inventing goes on a bit of a rant, I had a 40 minute long explanation on a friggin hammock one day, so watch out for that.

Some of them can take months in the game world. I'd say this sounds like about a week of working to make a reliable one due to the fine parts required, three days for an unreliable one.
Also it sounds like you could just glue two flasks together and get the same result. A very important, "no one will buy this because they can't be one hundred percent sure it's safe," kind of clause is probablly a good one to come up with.

My view is one is not able to pause an action in process to take another action. Just like how normally one cannot attack in the middle of a move. Any action needs to be resolved before another action can be taken. So, while trip provokes, the charger can't stop his charge, attack, then resume charging. In other words, yea he's given an opportunity to attack, but can't take it because he's already occupied in the middle of doing something else.

Well, you're wrong.

That being said it is totally up to the GM for their own game, and I totally understand your viewpoint. Somethings really do just happen too fast. In this case though a character slashing at what he knows is an off balance enemy as he runs past. In my GM opinion it's an AoO green light.

On Readying Actions RAW: "...The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your redied action...." Core Rule Book pg 203

The answer Findel is yes, on both accounts. Timmy triggers his readied action, and Charlie gets an attack of opportunity from this. To resolve this, once Timmy triggers his action (before he performs the attack though), Charlie gets his AoO. Charlie, because he is not making an attack is NOT at a negative 2 for his AC.

Obviously, if Charlie is tripped his charge is over. Good news for him though, he can now taste the sweet sweet stone before his face.

So say my players (~level 14) are in a dungon, and one of them started doing this agianst a rat.

I would have the roof cave in, if they were going up, or the floor fall through, if they were going down. I'd psudeo roll some percentiles for them, give them an easy reflex save (so they wouldn't die), and block the door with the rubble. I'd steadilly add monsters to the combat as they(the monsters) came wandering through the halls as needed to get the combat above "let's jumb around this rat," quality.

The easy way to do this would be, "you stepped on a pressure plate, you all hear a rumbling, and then a part of the celing falls on(or the floor falls out from under) the monster you were fighting!" . . Give them a second.... NOW! "OH! The rest of the floor/celing follows promptly, along with some pretty green slime."

So, you can never 'flank' with a crossbow.

You can, but you have to be willing to hit someone with your crossbow. ;)

So my personal opinion after reading 11 pages?(yeah, I skipped a few, wanna fight about it?)
I want to make a monk using every vow at once. At the same time I want to be a summoner, sadly I'm only available to play activly in one game at the moment.

I feel as though the flavor of the additions in UM weren't that good over all. I feel the kind of direct the player down an interstate with multiple exits. Rather than ask the player, "where should we build this road to?"

With that in mind, however, I look into them (the flavor points of UM) as wonderful steps in the right direction. When I say that I mean we shouldn't, as players, say, "well I'm the lizard druid so I don't like birds...." and instead we should say, "I'm the evil tifling monk who likes to make babies cry because they are unapriciative of the things they have."

I believe a literal bull could do a wonderful job of this, and thus a human with good bull studying habits.
Over all, I agree with big norse and starglim. Whilst adding something about grappling them at a negative to pick them up to apply the knock back.

Now, as for the Quarterstaff Master... the rules make it clear that 'you cannot use the Quarterstaff as a double weapon if using it one-handed'- So, no using both ends when using another weapon at the same time. Of course, you can 'change ends' between rounds.

Does Quaterstaff Master say what type of action(move, swift, &c) changing ends is?

Does going prone provoke AoO?

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I see them as equally wrong, just in different ways.

you know you could run a very interesting campaign where there was a rule that killing ANYONE who is sentient is considering evil no matter the circumstances.

not only that killing someone immediately taints you with the aura of an evil alignment.

I know there is a monk build/alternate class that works off of this. I believe UM actually says, "this monk will probably take a lot of grapple feats and use ropes or chains to tie up their enemies." The role play for it seems a little bland though.

I think pobbles has a great idea for that plot line, seems like a total eureka moment.

Secondly, the way elementals think. Say you have a fire elemental, from the domain/realm/homeland of 'fire,' or whatever hot name you want it to have. He would come to Golarion and go, "gosh it's cold." And light it all on fire to try and warm it up. Humans would be scared out of their minds, but he'd be super happy.
At least, that's the way my brain wants it to be. I like when things are super happy.

My groups, when we can't find rules, usually just go by the 3.5 ones. We are playing 3.75, so it works fairly well.

What snacks are the best for a good days worth of gaming.

The major criteria are price, goodness (the level of good-atude), and longevity.

Last week I brought the golden flake southern sweet bbq, pickle, and the rippley ones.
Together they wound up being 5 bucks for the chips, and I got the frito halapeno cheddar dip(which wasn't hot at all) which was like a buck fitty.

They all loved the bbq and original chips, not so much the pickle.

All in all I give the gold flake combo a 3.5 out of 5.0

This is one of those situations where bringing the tabletop/paper to three D actually helps. Think about looking at something about 15-20 feet tall, and 15 feet across. If you have a flask of acid, you're going to aim for the center of the creatre's mass you are currently seeing.

This would roughly be the stomach, or the chest. Thus, the "splash" would splash away from there.
This is opposed to trying to throw "at the tile it is standing on." This probably wouldn't seriously hurt the monster at all, and would probably only marginally scuff the tile.

If I know what square an unseen enemy is in, do I have line of sight? Do I have line of sight to an invisible foe I'm grappling?

No.

You don't have line of sight, but you are touching them. Your party would have LoS on you, and be able to target you though.

Added*
The hole probably wouldn't be tiny, seeing as he is medium sized, but this monk has invested hevilly in lard-esq products so he'll make it happen.

All I have to say is bonus feats

I vote for the ones I can use. If I had to pick just four would say one barbarian figure, one tall, or medium sized, spell caster, one short, or small sized, spell caster, and one monk.
Monks rock.

One of the homebrews I allow is that someone can "learn" a feat if they don't meet the prereqs, but not use it yet because they don't have the skills or knowledge to use it proficently.

I do it on a case by case basis, and strictly practiced based things, such as great cleve, just will not work that way.

Of course it's a dumb thing to do because the plaer doesn't get to do it yet.