Jodokai's page

I do it to everyone to keep it fair. If the GM forgets to take an AoO for example I'll remind them, even if it's on my character. If it's a player build, I'll usually talk to them outside of earshot of the GM, and just say something like "Hey I think you're doing this, and that's been FAQ'd so it doesn't work that way anymore. I'd ask the GM if you could take a different feat"... or whatever it is. If they want to argue, just tell them you'll bring it to the GM and let the GM decide.

I'm actually a little dissapointed but the original matter of the articles, because I want paladins moved AWAY from deities , and I think having them have to stick to a deity when that wasn't a real requirement before detracts from the class imo.

I've never really thought about his before. All of my groups have required Paladins and Clerics to follow a specific deity, and I wonder if this is where most of the paladin problems come from.

We never had a "does the paladin fall" issue because we took each situation and compared it to the paladin's god(dess)' tenets. Does law trump good? Who's your deity? Abadar, yes, law trumps good. Sarenrae, not so much.

• Invulnerable Rager - Barbarian: I love this archetype. It feels like the perfect balance. It gives up things that sting but what you get seems worth it.
  
• Stonelord - Paladin: Dwarven Paladins just seem like a staple, and the Stonelord is very flavorful and a lot of fun.
  
• Spellbinder - Wizard: I love Wizards, and am very disappointed that spontaneous casting is so much more effective and versatile. This archetype gives Wizards a reason to exist.
  
• Urban Barbarian - Barbarian: A lot of versatility expanding the Barbarian class.
  
• Scaled Fist - Monk: Very flavorful
  

I would concentrate on Archetypes that gets you more mileage out of the class. Urban Barbarian can create a completely different beast than Barbarian. Scaled Fist, and Stonelord change the class' primary stats or gets rid of them. Invulnerable Rager and Spellbinder... well I love them and I'm selfish.

EDIT: Well shoot a lot has changed since I started writing this post, took to long looking over everything. Only had one even make the list.

Something else I wanted to bring up: Unless you own every 1e book, and have played every AP, module, and PFS scenario that's ever been released for 3.5 and PF 1e, complaining about them not supporting 1e sounds like whining to me. You haven't done what's already there, why does it matter if there's nothing new?

swoosh wrote:

Talonhawke wrote:

So do you want a rushed FAQ

Do you really want to pull the 'don't rush it' card when the OP is more than two years old?

Do you think the team has been working on the masterpiece faq for two years?

No we think they've been ignoring it for two years, which I think is the problem.

A few things to watch out for... most PFS GMs I’ve run into have rules that you have to have your spellbook out to use Quick a Study. So it goes from a 2 round proposition to a 3 round one. Round 1 move action to take the book out. Whatever you want with your standard. Round 2 full round action to change spells. Round 3 actually cast the spell.

What bothers me most about this is you say “most” GMs. All PFS GMs should require you to have it out since that is RAW:

Also, expect possible table variation on Nidalese Shadow Veil. While it grants concealment, it never actually says it’s from dim light. This is good and bad. The good is that Darkvision shouldn’t negate it. The bad is that abilities that trigger off of being in dim light, like Scion of Shadows, won’t be guaranteed to work, depending on how the GM reads it. For that reason, I avoided taking Nidalese Shadow Veil, even though in theory it would have also helped me pull of Tenebrous Spells.

Darkvision never changes the lighting level, so any ability that says requires dim light works in dim light regardless of who has what vision. Just like being immune to fire doesn’t change the properties of flames.

Yeah I have to say I was very underwhelmed with this book. All the price of a bestiary with half the content. Any race I thought was mildly interesting was either large or took a penalty to DEX, making it a no go.

Now, you may have never played a game with a established setting that actually has it's own thing going on, and i'll list a few of my favorites. Shadowrun, where cyberpunk meets fantasy. Warhammer 40k, where in the grimdark future there is only War. Dragon Age, a modern one that should be familiar. All of these game systems have their setting firmly...

So you're complaint is that Starfinder that's been out a little less than 30 days, doesn't have as rich a setting as say Shadowrun, that's been out a little less than 30 years? I mean I guess that's a valid complaint..

Step-Up - It's situational, but really effective.

I tried to bull rush a bull the other day, and I imagine the Paizo development team would have similar results if they tried it, I'm reasonably certain they're scrawnier than I am.

If combat maneuvers against larger creatures with or without extra legs were easy then it would be pretty reasonable to have a feat with a BAB and Str requirement that lets you fly by flapping your hands really hard. But both seem absurd to me.

I tried casting Fireball the other day, couldn't do that. We should probably just take spells out of the game.

For example, 10 extra HP on level 10 or 2d10+10 temporary HP from Greater False Life for 10 hours is a no-brainer decision for me, personally.

That's not really what you're choosing between. Taking the +1HP doesn't prevent you from casting Greater False Life, it saves you 700gp. If there was an item that gave +10 HP for 700gp, that would be a "no-brainer". At 20th level you've saved yourself 25,725 gp, in scroll costs, which assumes you took the highest level you could at each level, 12,000 of that is from levels 16 on, so from levels 1-15 you've saved 13,725gp, at the cost of 15 HP. Is the Toughness feat worth 13,725? I'd say it is. Especially when you consider that an Ioun Stone that grats you +5 HP is worth 20k.

One of my favorites is Burning Disarm especially if you're a crossblooded Orc/Draconic sorcerer with Intensify. They'll either take 10d4+20 automatically, or it will be an automatic disarm, with a chance to take 10d4+20 on a failed reflex save, which I would say, is pretty strong for a second level spell (1st level + Intensify)

I've skipped a lot because there are a lot of unhelpful posts in this thread. Saying "hybrids" are fine, or "27 point buy is your problem" isn't helpful. You may think hybrids are fine and they work in your games the way you play, but you have no idea how the OP plays so you really have no idea if they're "fine" or not.

If you read the original post, you'll see 27 point buy isn't the problem with 6 out of 7 players. If you have 7 items and 6 of them work perfectly, you don't change the 6 to fix the 7th.

DeadJesterKelsier - Some advice:
1. Don't kill the character.
2. self-asses - He's a new-comer and admittedly not a friend. Are you being harder on him than the others? (Not judging, just be honest with yourself)
3. Assuming you have self-assessed and you're sure you're being fair, have you said something like this: "I'm the GM, and I'm trying to make the game fun for everyone. Everyone else is at a certain power level, and your character is significantly above that level. This means I the encounters that challenge you, are deadly to them, and if I set it to their level, you render their characters useless. You are making it so the others aren't having fun. I've tried talking to you, but you want to fight with me. It's not a matter of what's legal or what isn't, it's a matter of making sure everyone has fun.
4. Another option would be to let him know of all the rules you're letting him slide on. Does he have a spell component pouch (a lot of paladins and rangers seem to forget they need them too) are you making him drop his weapon when he lays on hands or cast spells (since he's using a heavy shield)?
5. With Meta-gaming I flat out ignore it, or I change the scenario on the spot, to use your prisoner example:
Metagamer: I execute the prisoner [based on circumstantial evidence]
GM: I feel like you're meta-gaming right now, are you sure that's what your character would do knowing that I may have changed the scenario?
Metagamer: Yes that's my character would do.
GM: Okay, you execute the prisoner and are immediately struck by a bolt of thunder that knocks you to your knees, you get a vision and a feeling in your heart that your god is displeased with your actions and has removed your paladinhood until you atone for killing an innocent.
Metagamer:...
GM: Are you sure you want to metagame?

Not all adventurers are good.

Not all good people are lawful good
Not all lawful good people are paladins

So no. It is not okay for a paladin just because other adventurers do it. Paladins have a higher standard than your typical murderhobo.

On top of that an orc cave in the wilderness is not remotely the same as the middle of a city. Old timey frontier justice works im the woods. Downtown hive of scum and villiany? Not so much.

It was a prisoner under thebpaladins care.the were helpless, conscious, and defiant. If they had lwtbher bleed out before that there wouldn't be a problem

There is no way to argue this with you. You agree that the paladin code is flexible but it can only flex in the way you want it to. The paladin can disobey legitimate authority but only the orders you have decided are worthy of being disobeyed. A paladin can dispatch a threat to innocents, but only in locations, again, you deem worthy.

What's funny is even in your Star Wars reference, frontier justice was the way things were done.

Blood-Boiling Pill - Who doesn't want +2 to Init for 8 hours?
Swarmbane Clasp - swarms suck.

Those are the only two I didn't see mentioned.

Jodokai wrote:

You're basing your opinion on what the norms are here on earth in modern times, not what they would be in a medieval-ish setting like Golarion.

No murdering people is literally the oldest law on the books. It predates books. Right back to stone tablets. The idea that people not liking outright strangers showing up and ganking people in the middle of their town is a modern invention is inane. A paladin especially draws on the codes of chivalry, in which killing a prisoner under your care is a HUGE no.

And yet we do it all the time in Pathfinder. Orcs invade a town so you go to their cave and slaughter them is the exact same scenario we have here. An evil threatens innocents so you kill them is the basis for 90% of all Pathfinder adventures.

And this isn't a case of "prisoner under your care" this is a case of "do I want to make this enemy combatant a prisoner or kill them" A paladin is under no obligation to show mercy to someone who is still a threat to innocents... just ask Sarenrae.

I got Ninja'd, but I want to address this:

"Out and out murder in the middle of a city, executing a prisoner, so tosses out the norms of society, law, and honorable conduct, that it's a boot over* to NG."

Again what "norms of society" are you talking about? 21st century Earth or Golarion? You're basing your opinion on what the norms are here on earth in modern times, not what they would be in a medieval-ish setting like Golarion. You're also bypassing the part of the code that says "punish those that threaten innocents".

Reven has already said it, but to reiterate:

If cheliax says you wear a chicken hat, then you wear a chicken hat.

If cheliax says you swear allegiance to asmodeuous, you mumble something in the crowd, rules lawyer "I swear to bring you into the light of saranrae," mayHAIL strike Asmodeuous or get whipped for remaining silent in a stoic show of defiance.

What's the difference between those two orders? They both come from "legitimate authority" and a paladin is required to respect legitimate authority. The code specifically says that, and doesn't even mention the god they worship at all.

You agree that a paladin can disregard orders from authority, we just disagree on which orders.

Yeah I disagree with you too BNW. Following that philosophy there couldn't have been any Paladins on the rebellion fighting against the Empire in Star Wars.

As far as the current situation, again read the PFS rules. The GM doesn't have the authority to immediately make you evil. At most they can give you an alignment infraction and it takes many infractions to change your alignment to change If the GM decides that you've earned enough to change alignment, he has to get approval from a Venture Officer. It also says that every god will forgive one lapse.

is the paladin a paladin of that redemption god?

No, Sarenrae is the redemption goddess. If it was a Paladin of Sarenrae it would be even less of a debate, and the paladin would kill her without hesitation.

Paladin: Repent
Evil Person: No
Paladin: *Coup de grâce*

Iomedae is a little different, but as I posted earlier, the code says to punish people who threaten innocents, so you're still safe.

I skipped a lot, maybe this have been covered, but the answer is in the Paladin's code in the core rule book:

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Your code demands you kill her.

EDIT: Also read the PFS Guidebook about alignment changes. If after you kill the assassin, the GM tries to change your alignment to Evil (which they can't do) talk your your VC, if it is your VC or your VC doesn't do anything talk to your region coordinator.

Does "taking the item that I obviously should have because nobody else could even use it" cost the same as an item that potentially everybody might want?

Yes. If you sold it the whole party could use the money.

Again, with my favorite system, the party owns everything, you can borrow things but if sell the item it gets split between the party. If you want to own the item, for example a belt of DEX that you want to upgrade, you have to buy out the other party members (pay the sell cost - what your share would be).

They cool WereBirbs.

In the sky silly.

There is no such thing as "overpowered" or "under powered" in a vacuum. Let's say you have a Rogue, a Wizard, a Cleric and a Fighter. If I said the Rogue has a 40 DEX, is the rogue overpowered? Answer: You have no idea. What if the Wizard had a 40 INT, the Cleric has a 40 WIS and the Fighter has a 40 STR?

Your player characters can't be more powerful than a GM. I don't care if they have 100's in all their stats, a GM can challenge them.

There can only be overpowered if:
1) Some character are much more powerful than the other characters
or
B) You're using a pre-made adventure that you're not adjusting for the party.

Archers a very underrated IMO..... can change encounters in a heartbeat

I don't think anyone underrates archers. It's pretty well known they do the highest sustained DPR of any build.

Fighter is probably going to win out overall as far as raw pew pew is concerned.

Warrior spirit
Tons of feats for a feat starved fighting style
Focused weapon
Gloves of dueling.

Honorable mention to Divine (ilsurian) marksman ranger archetype for making favored enemy help vs anything you fight but its probably not going to beat bane from warrior spirit.

It's not as pronounced as you might think. With class abilities and bonus feats, the Zen Archer actually gets more feats than a fighter up to level 11 I believe.

In terms of who's winning the DPR Olympics it won't be the Zen Archer, but there are things the Zen Archer can do that aren't quantifiable and are often dismissed. Cover and Concealment are circumstantial so aren't included in any formulas, but I would bet it is an issue in 90-99% of combats. Having Improved Precise Shot at 6th Level is HUGE.

This post from Porpentine really does a great job of breaking down the differences between Zen Archer and Fighter.

The Inquisitor is an interesting idea, I've never played one, but their abilities seem limited uses per day so not sure how sustained it would be.

If you know you'll be facing Undead the majority of the time, it'll be hard to beat the Ranger.

Allow me to quote you when someone asks this question:

Congratulations for a highly unoriginal concept. I pray it will be a great deal of fun for you, and will not cause your fellow players a great deal of headache.

I shall give you the same advice I have given the last umpteenth or so blind adventurers:

Ravingdork wrote:
Ever read The Dark Elf Trilogy? Montolio DeBrouchee is an excellent example of how to fight blind, even with ranged weapons.
Montolio was a blind archer ranger who would send his animal companion (a falcon) flying over his enemies' heads. The bird of prey would then call out to its master so Montolio always knew precisely where to shoot his arrows.
I can totally imagine a blind ranger doing this quite well with greater blind-fight, a flying animal companion, and full attacks.
Maybe you could emulate something similar with a Zen Archer monk archetype?
Malag wrote:
Try talking with your GM about giving you Blindsight or Blindsense instead of feat or something like that. This is the easiest way of creating such character.
People who are blind for a long time don't get free benefits (or rather, they shouldn't). They "adapt" by taking appropriate feats/skills (the APG blind-fight line and the Racial Heritage/Keen Scent feats along with Perception) and adopting appropriate mannerisms (like folding money and having round buttons on all your red clothes and square buttons on all your blue clothes).
Roleplayers playing a "blind swordsman" only to get something BETTER THAN SIGHT such as blindsight FOR FREE is a BIG pet peeve of mine.
If you want to be blind REALLY be blind. Being blind is a handicap. Make it as such.
Allow me to help with a few suggestions:
Step 1) Declare that your character is blind. This means he will suffer the following penalties: You cannot see. You take a –2 penalty to Armor Class, lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and take a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against you. You must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half your speed. If you fail this fail this check you fall prone. If your character has remained blind for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them (by getting a walking stick, by folding your bills, and training with feats and skills, NOT be getting blindsense or blindsight for free).
Step 2) Mitigate the penalties as much as you can. Start with a high Wisdom score, max out your ranks in Perception, and take feats such as Alertness, Blind-Fight, Greater Blind-Fight, Improved Blind-Fight, and Skill Focus (Perception). This will allow you to better "hear" where the enemy is at and allow you to avoid ranged attacks coming out of the darkness.
Step 3) Play the character and understand that no matter what you do, he is handicapped. Playing such a difficult challenge will be a lot of fun if your GM cooperates a little.
Blind people feel the shape of the buttons on their clothes. The shapes correspond with the colors of their clothes. That way a blind person can match his clothes and look nice. They also fold their money different ways so they can tell which bills are which. If you do a bit of research, you will find that there are tons of neat little tricks that blind people use to get by in every day life--adapting after years of being blind.
What the book refers to when it says "Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them" is not a mystical higher sense thing, but more of a learned skill thing.
Researching and utilizing a lot of these tricks should help make for a much better roleplaying experience.
I hope that helps.

Hope that helps.

Jodokai wrote:

EDIT:
Let's take it a step further, let's say I'm an Elf, does that mean I can't chose Rapier or longsword because I'm already proficient in it?

The character can still choose to use their proficiency to choose rapier. It won't do anything in and of itself, but will designate rapier as the elf's chosen weapon.

You see the problem is that people are saying the martial or exotic weapon chosen in the proficiency section HAS to be the Kensai's "chosen weapon". An Elf can't take Rapier as his proficiency from his class proficiency because he's already proficient.

That means an Elf Kensai is proficient in Longsword, Rapier, All Simple Weapons, and gets one more Exotic or Martial proficiency of their choice, and according to some, that last unnamed proficiency HAS to be the Kensai's chosen weapon, and it can't be Rapier or Longsword because they are already proficient in those.

If you don't agree with the above (and by "you" I mean anyone who thinks a Kensai can't choose a simple weapon), then you're completely making stuff up, because no where else is there any mention of exotic or martial weapon.

We just started LoF and made finished the church encounter, we all have an equal hatred for the little rat finks. That was one of the longest most brutal fights ever

One of the flying companions small bird (eagle/hawk) is very useful as a ranged Hunter. The teamwork feats Coordinated Shot, and Enfilading Fire will give you +4 when your bird flanks, which is easy for a flying companion to do and still leave the ground spaces open for the rest of the party.

Give your bird Mobility and Reach Defense, use the Alternate Advancement for a higher DEX and the Tiger Focus (Tiger and Snake at 8th level), and it's AC will probably outclass yours, especially for AoO. You'll also want to give it the Low Profile feat depending on how much a stickler your GM is.

If you do raise your bird's Intelligence to 3, give it Combat Advice for another +2 to hit, then can use Aid Another to give an ally a bonus to hit or AC.

Let's say your bird is flanking, and giving you Combat Advice, you're now +6 to hit (on top of any buffs you've given yourself) you don't you can use your focus for STR and do more damage.

EDIT:
I didn't see Small Cat in your list either. Again, max out it's DEX use Alternate Advancement, take Agile Maneuvers and you have a tripping monster... Not in a drug induced sort of way.

I only read most of the first page, but if it helps anyone understand it better, you're not taking a 5' step then moving, you're taking a 5' step and casting a spell (or using a Sp or Ex), the effect of the spell is that it puts you somewhere else.

I always thought of Gandalf as a Druid wielding a straight scimitar.

Seriously though, Elves are proficient in longswords and PFS has an Intelligent sword, so that may be one reason.

You have a very inaccurate understanding of what the people around you think. I recommend asking some of those people for their thoughts, digesting their responses, and rephrasing it back to them; then repeating that process until they say "Yeah, that's what I'm saying". Do that with a few different people and see if your perspective changes.

I wish I did, but I really don't. I say it in more negative terms, but it is completely accurate. I can take you though the numerous threads I've used to draw those conclusions. Take a look at all of the "the paladin falls" threads. People want a concrete set of rules to follow that applies to every single circumstance. They want rules to cover what should be the GM's area. People hate the magic crafting system, why? Because it requires a lot of GM oversite. Still not convinced? Look at how many times I've said "The GM can say no to things that are legal in the rules" and see the push back I get for those statements. As soon as I saw Shadow's post I KNEW he was going to get push back, sure enough, and with 5 people hitting Favorite too. Deny it all you want, and maybe you specifically don't feel that way, but the general feel on the boards is that anything that requires a lot of GM input is frowned upon.

Shadowlords wrote:

Since when did the game need to be balanced....[...]

if [...] one person is taking the spot light it is your job as the DM to "balance" the game.

Under what other circumstances is this kind of nonsense acceptable?

If I go to the dentist and he drills the wrong tooth, it's not my job to fill the cavities he missed.

If I go to the mechanic and he forgets to re-attach the cylinder head, it's not my job to put it back on.

If I go to a restaurant and get served raw chicken, it's not my job to go back into the kitchen and cook it all the way through.

If I get onto an airplane and the pilot doesn't know how to find San Bernadino, it's not my job to navigate.

If I hire a carpenter and he forgets the fourth leg of my table, it's not my job to work the lathe.

As soon as I saw Shadowlords' post I started laughing, not because I think what he's said is funny, he's 100% correct as far as I'm concerned, but the second you suggest the GM should have some control over his game, this forum goes into an uproar.

The problem with all your examples is that you're putting in emphasis on the wrong person. The person in the dentist chair (you) is the Player Character, the Dentist is an NPC. In none of you examples is there a GM to speak of, since they don't really exist unless you believe in a higher power maybe.

I'm about to say something that most people on this board hate: As GM you have to right to say no. Even if a player brings a a perfectly rules legal character to the table, you can tell that player "That's not going to work for my game". You have that control as the GM. The players either accept that you're doing it so everyone enjoys the game more, or they don't, in which case, find better players that will trust you as a GM.

The only one that doesn't jive with me is: Do not prey on the weakness of others, and forbid this conduct from others.

Typically Irori isn't about telling others what to do. Each must find their own path to enlightenment and all that. I would make it more about setting the example than forbidding others.

I just see it sitting there and gathering dust... and well, why not?

Someone went through all the trouble to think it, write it, refine it, then publish it. It would be a waste and an insult to the creators not to use their creations.

I cannot fathom a reason not to use them. If i'm not wrong the idea of playing d20 games is to grab a game setting, use its rules and books as guides and reference and then homebrew whatever else you want... not to be bound by the books. This groups even go and create stuff out of nowhere for us and people refuse to use it? It's dumb.

The only reason I can imagine for not using them is because the DM is way too lazy to make an effort and think about what he has to do to counter this new stuff. There has always been stuff created by 3rd parties that were later added as official content, why is this different? Why do DMs get scared of content from a different source?

The problem I have the 3PP is that not everyone has access to all the books the other players have. You mistakenly think balance is between the players and the GM, it's not. The GM can do whatever he wants so that will never be balanced. Balance is between players. All players should be relatively the same power level or it creates problems.

That said, I do universally allow Psionics from Dreamscared Press. The fact that it's available on d20pfsrd helps, but even it wasn't, I would still allow it. Love that stuff.

QuidEst wrote:

Reverse psychology. If he opposes everything you suggest, just suggest the opposite of what you want.

Also, if you aren't a divine caster with an aura, you don't detect as evil for another couple levels.

This. Every bit this.

Except they're 6th level, so none of that actually.

I agree with Heretek. You can't trick him by pretending to gradually repent. Sarenrae gives you one shot, you don't take it, you get smited. there is no:
"Repent!"
"Well...hmm let me sleep on it a bit"
That won't fly. I think some of you focus too much on the "give them a chance" and are skipping the "one chance before you gut them"

As far as the "Stop me robbing or save the children", okay I'll save the children, but since we're traveling together, I'll know where you'll be later, and you'll either willingly give everything back, or you'll make a posthumous donation.

The real issue though is the one that's spelled out in the core rulebook. Paladin's can't work with evil characters. Yes, yes stopping an evil god, but you can't be like "Okay we need to stop this evil god in 40 years, so we'll just travel together until then" Or even, there has to be a reason why it has to be that character. Couldn't the paladin find a lawful good sorcerer to stop the evil god with?

Another feat you'll want to look at is Shapeshifting Hunter Ranger will stack with Druid for number of shifts per day. Druid stacks with Ranger for Favored Enemy.

Here's my build, which is sort of the opposite of yours, I really just took a level of Ranger to get Favored Enemy, and some rogue-like skills.

I took the Eagle Domain for the bonus to hit with Ranged Touch Attacks and Perception for Trap Finding. Also a Familiar gives me Ranged Cure spells.

The bigger problem is the Lawful Evil Gunslinger that is one of his companions.

Now, I was hoping that one of the neutral characters would be interested, and if all else fails the LE Gunslinger might be game.

This is my PFS Unchained Rogue at 9th level

I'll try to break down a combat round with Canny Tumble and Circling Mongoose, and two weapon fighting:
If you aren't adjacent to the target, you move up to them moving through a threatened square rolling Acrobatics. If you beat their CMD, they lose their DEX bonus, so you get sneak attack, and you get +2 to hit from Canny Tumble, if you don't beat their CMD, well you get +4 to AC from Mobility so hopefully they miss.

Next round, now that you are adjacent to the enemy, you combine Canny Tumble and Circling Mongoose. You take a 5' step, which provokes, so you use Acrobatics. This accomplishes the same thing as above (denied DEX for that attack, sneak attack, and +2 to hit). If you hit, yiy apply your Debilitating Injury: Bewildered (-4 to AC vs You) you take another 5' step and hit with your off-hand. You're considered Flanking, so that's +2 to hit and you get sneak attack, they are at -4 to AC from your Deb Strike. If that hits, you take another 5' step and hit with your iterative attack with the same benefits as before (+2 and sneak attack for flanking, -4 to their AC). If that hits, instead of applying your Debilitating Injury: Bewildered (-4 to AC vs You), you apply Debilitating Injury: Disoriented (-4 to hit you, -2 to hit anyone else).

This let's you pretty much get sneak attack every time you attack. If you look my Acrobatics is +31 at 9th level so I don't need much more than a 5 on the d20 to beat most CMD's, but that's with a Half-Elf's Skill Focus and a ring of unquenchable passions.

EDIT: I don't take Scout because I can get Circling Mongoose to come online at 8th with the Swashbuckler Archetype (or 9th without it) and the Scout comes online at about the same time. The trade-offs are Scouts keep their Trap abilities, Swashbuckler Archetype doesn't, but Scouts don't get full attacks with sneak attack, Circling Mongoose does.

Put me in a world where magic works and then throw some magic spell in there with the talking, and I'll peck the ground for seed like anyone else.

But just talking?

Ain't gonna happen. Ever.

And no amount of Bluff skill can achieve something like that.

If you don't start out with something believable, you auto-fail. Period. Because you just can't talk anyone into believing something that is obviously not true unless for some reason they WANT to believe the untruth (in which case, you're really just permitting them to believe what they want to believe). All other cases of OBVIOUS untruth are auto-fail.

Fair enough, but don't get upset if you're sleeping and you make a 36 perception check to hear the ninja about to kill you and your GM says "Nope, hearing a Ninja while you're sleeping in impossible, so you're dead"

Heck while we're add it, don't get mad when the GM tells you can't shoot 4 arrows a round because that's impossible. You can't use your Manyshot feat because any kind of accuracy with two arrows on a string is impossible. Two-Weapon fighting is pretty much impossible too. Gee what a boring game.

Well, we now know that Pack Flanking is a combat feat. I'm sure the four people that effected are very happy to know that.

"You can ask an audience to believe the impossible, but not the improbable."

Thats what it boils down to (regarding Bluff and believing Magic Missiles and Dragons).

I get that. I get the suspension of disbelief, but what seems less plausible to you:

Or

Situation 2:
"Man I'm good, totally convinced that guard, I belong here"

Out of those two situations, I would say Situation 1 is much harder to stomach, but we accept it out of hand because of the chart in the Perception skill.

Speaking as someone who's bluffed their way onto more than one military base in more than one country without proper identification, it is absolutely possible. There were times that the guard post was warned ahead of time that someone was going to try to bluff their way past, and was still able to do it.

Why are we so selective in this game? Why do we accept magic missiles, and elves being able to hear a bow being drawn through a wall, but we can't accept someone can convince someone else of a lie? We can't accept that some characters have reflexes so quick, that even if you're ready for them, they can act before you (the whole readying out of combat debate) but we accept that a Rapier made of of a special material can poke through an iron bar. Why is one so acceptable, but the other so far from the realm of possibility that we feel the need to dismiss it? I don't get it.

I agree with most of what Mysteroius Stranger said. I don't make Fighters role-play their attack sequence and then say "Meh you didn't impress me, you don't get to attack this round" so I don't do the same to social skills.

The part I disagree with is that I believe Bluff can convince someone that the sky is purple even if they're looking right at it. To understand my reason, let's look at something more quantifiable than Bluff, let's look at Perception.

I have an 11th level character that has a 35 to perception. If we look at the perception chart, if my character rolls a 1 on a perception check he can hear a bow being drawn from the other side of a 1 foot think wall. Or, again if he rolls a 1, he could sense a creature burrowing underneath him while he was asleep. Now I don't know about you, but that seems pretty far into the realm of superhuman. If perception can do that, why not bluff?

Bluff says that if they lie is impossible, i.e. the sky is purple, then your opponent gets +20 to his sense motive. The chart also says that if you possess convincing proof, you get +10, but I also take that to mean if the opponent has convincing proof that you're lying, like seeing a blue sky, they get +10. So if your Bluff can beat your opponents sense motive check +30, then yes they believe the sky is purple. I mean is that really any more far fetched than being able to hear a bow being drawn through a foot thick wall?

If you're still not convinced consider the real world example of a man who convinced an entire country all their problems were caused not by a war they just lost and the harsh treaty imposed on them, but by a group of religious people.

Never mind I found it. Mike Brock made a post about it on This thread

Wand use doesn't require the book for those few improved familiars - brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars - gained with the Improved Familiar feat

It can use a wand since it is slotless. It uses its master's UMD. No other animal companions or familiars can activate a magic item.