Kelsea Wessel's page

My only point with the example was that it would (and should) be difficult.

I guess Im just a bit more rigid when dealing with these hard to tackle subjects.

On the other hand, the Paladin/Hellknight might catch a child who stole bread to feed his starving family. The Law might dictate that the offender lose his hand. Now what does the Paladin/Hellknight do?

Much better example. And that is why I would not allow any good alignment paladins to be hellknights.

If I was running the game, I'd have to say no....sort of.

Like the others have said: the Hellknights number one rule is that you enforce the law at all times and nothing ever trumps what is written as law. Any good alignment paladin would suffer from that rule.

The only way I could see this working is if the paladin and their god were both a non good alignment. Reason being, any good alignment paladins will (even the LG ones) do everything in their power to right wrongs, even if it may go against local laws at times. I know, I know, I might get flamed for the that comment including LG. But if a LG paladin had the opportunity to save hundreds of lives by bashing down a wall(grand vandalism) so that they could escape a deadly fire, they will.
Hellknights would NEVER do that. That would be committing a crime by busting down that wall.
(non-good doesn't mean that hellknights are inherently bad people.)

Would be entertaining to see you guys stumble across a dead adventurer (read: Foolish), and to find on his body nonsensical things that one would question as to why he even brought that in with him.

I would have to still place the blame on the GM mainly for this issue. He is defending the player and indirectly encouraging him to continue to be a disruptive member of the group, both in and out of character. The fact that this person's character hasn't died already is actually shocking to me considering that your party is level 11-12.

And your elaboration on the traps part; 1 out of 4? That is NOT a decent trap disarmer, ESPECIALLY at his level. Whatever character you are, I would suggest throwing a wrench into his play-style. ANY of my characters, even the goofs would be infuriated by this character's lack of support in any aspect. I would probably try to kill him off during an encounter despite any danger I put myself in.

Fun Fact: In the Stalin Era of Russia, This character would have already been killed for being a coward.

guess what the player has around 20 years of experience in RPGs he's been playing since 1st edition.

oh lawd. Well then throw the issue into roleplay! Make your character gripe about his absence during the last big fight and could have used his help. Make snide remarks about being a sub par rogue, or better yet, like EWHM suggested (kind of), Use your loot earnings to hire an NPC that makes him feel useless! Obviously these methods require great amounts of tact and good roleplay, but it very effectively brings those issues to light in both worlds.

I'll start off by saying that character optimization is NOT wrong. It's just another way of playing.

Sometimes, there can be encounters created that emphasize having a character stay OUT of combat. Makes things pretty interesting. If your GM wants to go that route, id suggest tailoring some that would make it seem campaign-wise that everyone is doing whats necessary(like have him escort a high-value person while others defend).

As for his actions though, Id say it's a mix of two things:
1. Your GM is not being strong handed enough with the consequences of him purposely avoiding combat and generally doing things that his character is simply not skilled at.

2. This rogue player seems to have a completely different agenda than the rest of the group and it's quite obvious. Im guessing he just is fairly new to the whole pen and paper mindset and is going about it like any of us would when we are new to something; mess around to figure out what we really wanna do.

Id say this situation doesnt really need any action at all. Id say to wait till after your campaign to discuss things.

I figured as much, I wanted to double check. Im going to be using the mask for a trip bard who follows Zon Kuthon. I felt it would be a nice flavor item for the character.

I'll see if the GM is cool with the earned tolerance to the charisma dmg.

OK so I was reading up on this mask and was a little unsure of the mechanics behind the negative effects of this mask.

Here are a few questions that I have about it:

Does the charisma damage stay until healed?
Are the effects permanent? (most likely not cause it doesnt say that, right?
Does this damage stack every time I put the mask on?

If farmer Bob was of good alignment he is no longer if he is thinking and or killing people...Farmer Bob needs an alignment change. Actions speak louder than words...

Actions and thoughts are very different things. I'm pretty darn sure that the epitome of good (Read: LG Paladins) have been tempted with more than a few thoughts of very wrathful and evil actions especially if something happened to ones that they truly cared for. To act on those thoughts, however, can certainly condemn them.

I agree with how ravingdork has interpreted this rule.

Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.

Immediately brings to mind the Repo man style from Repo the Genetic Opera.
I would recommend you watch that if you want to see your idea fleshed out a bit.

Id also read into JTHM(a bit more insane, but similar thought vein)

Sounds also like he'd be able to easily delve into fleshcrafting or some kind of profane magic like the Tzimisce's Vicissitude from Vampire the Masquerade.

EDIT: Excerpt from the movie Repo the Genetic Opera. NSFW and definitely isnt for the easily disturbed.

Yeah - the LoF companion book introduced a bunch of 'Achievement Feats' where you needed to do 'X' in-game to qualify. They're an interesting idea, but I think the excess bookkeeping puts most people off, and since we don't seem to have seen hide not hair of them from Pazio since, I'm guessing they didn't get a lot of positive feedback on the concept.

You know, you just gave me an idea of a new house rule. Maybe instead of making them painstaking to track just to attain the feat, maybe they can be supplemented as a reward for certain encounters. Like replacing some or all treasure of an encounter to reward them with the feat. Leaving it up to the GM.

The Pathfinder Companion for the Legacy of Fire Adventure Path has an 'Achievement Feat' called 'Legacy of Scars' (on page 29) with a prerequisite of taking 1,000 points of damage, where magical healing reduces your running total (for the purposes of qualifying) by 1 per 5 points of damage magically healed.

(The Feat iteself, if you ever qualify and take it, means your thick scars give you a -2 penalty on Charisma-based Skill checks, but increase your natural armour bonus by +2).

You know, I really like the idea of that Feat, but it just seems way too tedious for it to seem worthwhile. I for one, would easily lose count of the damage taken by the time I could feasibly qualify for it.

Final Fantasy brain kicked in when I said that. I say silly things sometimes.

Casting regen on someone who is bleeding is like attaching an IV of blood for someone who is bleeding out from a missing limb. Both conditions are working independently.

Ok then, even though The definition of Object doesn't allow my idea to work through the standard rules, How would my other questions work if the GM did allow it?

.

..
...
....
.....

O_o When you say 'at a caster' do you mean 'place them within striking range' or physically attacking the caster with the rogue?

If it's the latter, I'd wonder if the rogue is going to get hurt..

*shakes fist*

Well, I was meaning either getting him in striking range or having him ready an attack before i throw him so he ca attack upon reaching destination.

That also sucks that Object cant extend to PCs

I was wondering if this is even a viable idea in combat.

Hurling, Lesser (Ex): As a full-round action while raging, the
barbarian can lift and hurl an object up to one size category
smaller than herself with both hands or two size categories
smaller with one hand as an improvised weapon with a range
increment of 10 feet.

Hurling, Greater (Ex): As hurling, but the barbarian can
increase the range increment to 30 feet or increase the size of
a hurled object by two size categories.

So does this mean I can toss something of medium size and for a distance of 30 feet if I have Enlarge cast on me while raged?

I really like the idea of tossing my party's rogue at a caster who needs to be taken down quickly.

And if this is possible, would the rogue create AoO against himself, Be able to attack the target in the same round, and have to make a CM check in order to succeed at this? Would I have to as well? or would the fact that Hurling is a rage ability negate the need for a CM check?

If you've taken the Detect Magic cantrip you'll need a rank of Spellcraft to actually use it to its full extent (Spellcraft is 'trained only'). A rank of Knowledge (arcana) also helps a bit.

Ooh, good tip.

That is.. unless there is some flavor motivating your choices.

My final skills picked for lvl 1: Acrobatics, Bluff, Escape Artist, Heal, Know Religion, Perception, Acting, Oratory, Stealth, and Use Magic Device.

There is some character flavor reflected in these choices.
She is from Nidal, and worships Zon-Kuthon. Not everyone is ok with this. She's technically supposed to be dead since she was chosen for the Culling; causing her to flee the country. She was chosen because she was caught continuing her practice in entertainment(of which is heavily suppressed in the country) Subtlety is a large factor for her.

Don't ever dip more then two level for a bard. 3 levels can be done if your going to level 20. Some of your dip options.

Dip 2 levels fighter for 2 feats and all martial weapons.
Dip 1 level fighter for feat and all martial weapons. Better then two level dip
Dip 2 levels monk for save bonus and evasion.
Dip 2 levels rogue for trapfinding and evasion. I like this best in it lets you cover two jobs. Unless your taking vagavond child.
Dip 2 levels of paladin if you realy want a save bonus. It includes all martial weapons.
Dip 2 levels of Ranger martial weapons and one free feat. Better off with paladin or fighter.
Dip 1 level Barbarian martial weapons and fast move. Very nice over all. I don't like barbarian so ill never use it but it's a good dip.

Cool, this is exactly what I was trying to figure out. Thanks!

Also to clarify what I said earlier was whether or not to dip early or later. (my question exampled 3 bard/1 fighter) I realized the wording made it a little odd.

Thanks calagnar, I'll take your skills suggestions into consideration and tweak my character a bit more.

Now I have been seeing that multiclassing isn't always good for bard builds, but I have also seen that maybe a one or two level dip is nice for certain things.

Would it be wise of me to go fighter at 4th lvl for a bonus feat? or is it more worth while to dip into the monk for the save bonuses?

Even better, if you're a human Bard, you can essentially trade your favoured class bonus for masterpieces instead!

That definitely sounds cool! How do you do this?

Emphasis mine. Note, you CAN change them. Not, you HAVE to change them.

Did you miss the fact that it was a joke?

D&D/d20/Pathfinder is really a rules based game. Sure, you can play it however you want, changes whatever you want. But why, and how, does that fact repeatedly get in the way of trying to get rules clarifications and fixes from Paizo on this forum?

You seem to have not read the Getting Started portion of the Core Rule Book

The Most Important Rule...
...Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs

That is why it keeps being brought up :P

It's minor because it's so terrible and confusing that no one uses it, so the questions never come up. No of the players in my group ever grapple -- the DM throws monsters that do occasionally, but they almost always have Grab, and then just release the grapple immediately after dealing the damage.

If the Grapple rules were a) clear, and/or b) effective, more people would use them.

Im sure I'll get roasted for this, but: If this is a minor issue, no one really uses it since its broken now anyway, and that the rules are still confusing for people, why the fuss?

What happened when you realized that your remote control was broken? You kept watching TV; only difference was you had to press the buttons on it to change channels. You are still able to do the things that you want to with the TV, just not as easily.

Yea, its ruling is weird. Yes it needs to be fixed. Will this stop me from using grapple in my games? No. Will it completely ruin the fun for those that are into hardcore Society play? I sure as hell hope not.

My point: Rules sometimes get in the way of people having fun with the game. Take what you believe is right, and play it that way! And if you want, keep asking for a better written rule! Just don't let something like this sour your day. It's pointless.

*The "FAQ" system is the closest to errata they have but it still isn't errata nor is it particularly at-hand for average people looking for a solution to an issue.
*But outside that, the use of Pinning is terrible after this ruling.

But it is a minor issue :)

EVERY issue can be addressed and "fixed" by a GM as a house rule. That doesn't mean it isn't an issue that needs to be fixed at the top. Especially given the existence of things like the Living systems or Pathfinder Society.

You also seem to forget that this blog statement was made for those issues you are talking about. You complain that Grappling/Pinning is convoluted even after they state that this is the way it is? (that means the rules about grappling/pinning in all published work previous this is no longer valid to your arguments)

The expectation seems to be that there's some kind of firewatch team ready to scramble on every vague clause in the book, and they should get it right instantly, the first time. I wouldn't want to GM for people who think this is a problem, it seems like they would be the worst kind of gainsayers.

Wait wait wait. Common Sense? In this thread? Tar and feather I say!

The opposition to correcting problems is one thing really bothering me about how Paizo is running Pathfinder.

Now, I'm with you on fixing confusing mechanics, but I would much rather have Paizo continue to place more content that completes their world over something that can be addressed by a GM as a house rule.

Should it get fixed/clarified? Yes

Should Paizo make priority to edit all instances of their rules in every piece of their work including outdated books to coincide with what they stated will be the rule from here on out?

Absolutely not.

Grease is a surprising choice, though. Were you aware of its use to disarm, or that any target that so much as attempts to simply MOVE within the area of its effect becomes flat-footed? (Yep. Sneak Attack City, Population: Your Rogue)

I also can cast grease on my partner's armor/clothing to give them a bonus to resist grapples(they are pretty damn tasty though).

I also have been reading through that thread; I actually faved Howie23's post that consolidated most of the rules. Very handy list!

Essentially, they just stand there mesmerized by the wall as they slowly cook.

So you are trying to make an Adventurer Zapper?

Im not sure how you could make it dazing as well. How would that work?

Ok, so for anyone still interested in what I have decided to do for this character build, I have provided this final draft:
.
.
.
.
lvl 1 Bard(Favored; Skill bonus), Human
STR 14
DEX 18(racial +2)
CON 15
INT 14
WIS 13
CHA 17

Saves:
F +2
R +6
W +3

Scorpion Whip (Adventurer's Armory)
1d4 slashing, crit 20/2X, disarm and trip
Pending GM approval, I will replace Urban Child Trait for Heirloom Masterwork Scorpion Whip.

Studded Leather(From what I read, EXACTLY the same as parade armor sans the mini nation bonus thing)

Skills taken: Acrobatics, Bluff, Diplomacy, Escape Artist, Heal, Perception, Perform: Act, Perform: Comedy, Stealth, and Use Magic Device.

Feats: Combat Expertise and Improved Trip
Traits: Chance Savior(Carion crown feat; adds +2 init) and Urban Child: Disable Device(APG)

Spells:
Lvl 0: Dancing Lights, Detect Magic, Prestidigitation, and Spark
Lvl 1: Grease and Saving Finale

SO, what do you think?

Torture wrote:

The targets of a wordspell with this effect word are nauseated; they receive another save at the end of their turn to end this effect.

Torture Effect Word

Do the targets
a) Receive one extra save at the end of their next turn
or
b) Receive an extra save at the end of each of their turns as long as the effect persists?

When you cast it, they have a chance to resist it that round, but have to roll to resist it every round after that until they succeed, which will end the effect, from what I understand.

I will always use the purchase price of something as the value I consider when creating a treasure. I do this because if I used the likely resale value, players could potentially get an item that is more powerful than they should be getting at their level.

EDIT: Or more good gear than I want to give them. I'm stingy with item drops though.

Quilted cloth only gets that DR vs 'small ranged piercing' weapons - which is a pretty limited selection of stuff considering you could be wearing masterwork studded leather with an extra +2 AC (above quilted cloth's AC that is) and still no armour check penalties. That, and you look like the Shocker from the Spider-man comics... ;)

I guess it depends if you know you'll be mostly getting attack by arrows or not... if the bad guys choose to throw rocks, or hurl axes, or... gods forbid... melee with you, then quilted cloth is a little pointless.

It's an interesting choice though, certainly, and I'd like to hear how you got on with it if you do go that route.

Well, this character idea is for Carrion Crown. No Idea if that small benefit will pay off; I might as well play safe and get the much cheaper studded leather.

Assassin and Shadowdancer uses magic to HIPS and as such their HIPS doesn't work in an anti-magic area for example. Ranger is just trained to HIPS and he can do it anywhere in his favored terrain.

That's how it works RAW anyway.

Overlooked that. Gotta remember that for when Im the dm since one of my friends likes HIPS in an almost intimate way.

Hey foot, cmere. I need to gnaw on you for a bit.

If you mean that Rangers don't need shadow at all but assassins and shadowdancers do, then sure.

They're doing different things, here - Rangers are making use of their Camoflague and Terrain knowledge to make themselves blend in to the terrain around them.

Shadowdancers and Assassins are actually tapping some sort of magical source to power the ability.

Rangers would still need shadows(aka dim lighting) to perform their action. Camouflage uses shadows at it's core. No Shadows, no effective camo.

Like I said, for HIPS, the EX/SU seems more like flavor than anything else.

EDIT: Unless the Ranger's Favored Terrain is the Matrix white room and he is wearing all white, no shadows needed. :P

Worth noting also that Assassin and Shadowdancer HIPS is (Su) while Ranger HIPS is (Ex).

I see that as simply the methods used and as an imaginary visual aid. Requirements and results of doing so are still the same.

1) A "Spiked Chain" is a weapon you have to take a feat to be proficient in the use of.
2) How would it take "smarts" to think of? I hit something with a flexible weapon, said flexible weapon inherently starts to wrap at the point of impact. "Hey, I bet I could wrap that around someone's leg." And if you have ever watched ANY show about people doing stupid stuff, you would realize "Hey, I bet I could..." has NOTHING to do with smarts. At all. I wonder how many Darwin Awards started out with "Hey, I bet I could X with this here Y." Geniuses all, no doubt.
3) How is an argument against an Int 13 and Combat Expertise being a pre-req for Improved Trip an argument against needing Improved Trip to be good at tripping?

That just explains why it's not always successful for someone who figures things out in that manner(meaning the penalty for attempting).

Quote:

"A Balrog. A demon of the ancient world. This foe is beyond any of you..."

... but not me, 'cos I'm playing a Wizard in Pathfinder, and I'm about to break out Ultimate Magic... ;p

Quote:

Thanks for the help all, but I'm thinking about a polearm bard instead.

That's the beauty of the whip when it comes to Bards - they get proficiency for free. That Combat Expertise - Improved Trip - Greater Trip Feat chain you'll be taking to use with your polearm? Well, that doesn't stop it working with a whip too... plus they're cheap, and easy to carry (and a certain Doctor Jones swears by 'em...).

He also carries a satchel. If Indy carries one, that must make it manly! :p

I noticed that my armor choice question was left unanswered.

It seems right, but I would like someone's input on my starting armor choice

Is Quilted Cloth a good choice for starting armor?
I figured it was a good idea sincethere is No ACP penalty and I get a DR of 3/- against any projectile, magic notwithstanding.

Dale Wessel wrote:

I dont see any reason to continue beating a dead horse about CE.

Seeing the way new feats are designed, is definitively not a dead horse.

I've seen feat chains continue to rampage in APG too.

I'm speaking purely about CE, but I know what you mean.

Very well thought out statement, Aldin.
And Cartigan makes a good counter point.

Bottom line here: Until a Developer steps in, this argument should be handled via house rules.

I dont see any reason to continue beating a dead horse about CE.

Dale Wessel wrote:

This is fantastic. This will end the forum arguments about this!

You are overly optimistic.

I am, mostly because I have this thing in my brain that allows me to filter out threads that argue something that has already been resolved.

I think it's a tumor, but my doctor says it's benign, so I'm good!

Eric Hinkle wrote:

Kthulhu wrote:

Down with Seoni! Up with Feiya! She's hotter, she's cooler, she has better powers, her familiar is better...she's just superior in all ways!

Can't we have them both...?

Yes, we can!

and Alahazra, and Amiri, and Dark Mistress, and Merisiel ...

Don't forget Queen Abrogail II!!!!

This is fantastic. This will end the forum arguments about this!

Personally, I would still switch your STR and DEX scores. Add Agile Maneuvers as a feat next level. You'll be sucking up the lower CMB for a level sure, but next level you'll have the benefits of both AC and CMB thanks to your increased DEX modifier.

Yeah, Im sticking with that method. Not only do I get better AC and CMB once I pick up Agile Maneuvers, I now have a +6 Initiative.

Blammo!

great mention, c873788.
I didn't know about this!.

Dale Wessel wrote:

2. they will still need shadows within 10ft.

5. ah ok, i get what you mean now. Yes, from what I understand.

2. Is this a general rule somewhere? Their ability only states:

d20pfsrd wrote:

Hide in Plain Sight (Ex)

While in any of his favored terrains, a ranger of 17th level or higher can use the Stealth skill even while being observed.

Ah, I was using the Assassin version apparently.

Hide in Plain Sight (Su): At 8th level, an assassin can use
the Stealth skill even while being observed. As long as he is
within 10 feet of some sort of shadow, an assassin can hide
himself from view in the open without having anything
to actually hide behind. He cannot, however, hide in his
own shadow.

This is interesting in that 'Hide in Plain Sight' isn't a homogenized ability.

Since thats the case i would ask your DM how he wants to handle that. For myself though as a DM, i would enforce the Assassin rules to the ranger as well, requiring the shadows.